Officers claim they kept their distance during a brief pursuit through downtown Rochester. But these precautions are little comfort to the family of a deceased 46-year-old man who was blindsided as he went though an intersection.
Officers responding to a shots-fired report saw a suspicious silver Jeep leave the area. When they tried to pull over the vehicle, the driver accelerated away. The suspect fled toward downtown with officers in pursuit. The chase ended when the suspect ran a red light at the intersection of St. Paul and Main Street. The driver of the other car died almost instantly. A subsequent search of the suspect's car revealed some prescription drugs and a firearm.
The suspect, who was on parole for a 2017 weapons violation, is still in custody. He now faces several charges, including vehicular manslaughter and DUI. The Rochester Police Department promised to release body camera footage which recorded the incident at a later date.
As far back as 1990, the Department of Justice called high-speed police chases "the most dangerous of all ordinary police activities." Furthermore, even back then, local police departments had taken some steps to reduce the number of reckless police shootings. Whether or not those measures were effective is another matter. By comparison, the DOJ noted, local law enforcement agencies had done almost nothing to control police chases, even though reckless chases are contrary to the "basic police mission" of protecting life and property.
Over the following years, a few law enforcement agencies rolled out policies which discourage high-speed pursuits. But for the most part, these policies are so vague that they are pretty much meaningless. More on that below.
Publicly, police officers often justify dangerous chases with he classic "we cannot selectively enforce the laws" line. These is some truth in this assertion. Officers shouldn't always ignore lawbreakers simply because they don't cooperate. However, the off-the-record justification for reckless chases is much more sinister. Many officers enjoy the adrenaline rush that comes from "getting the bad guy." That emotional fact of life is probably the main reason police chases are here to stay, at least for awhile.
Atlanta's recent police chase experience is a good example of this dichotomy. In January 2020, in the wake of a very controversial and dangerous police chase, Police Chief Erika Shields immediately instituted a zero-chase policy. Her successor, interim Police Chief Rodney Bryant, almost immediately rescinded that policy. Officers' negative reactions to the zero-chase policy probably hastened Chief Shields' ouster.
SInce the DOJ's aforementioned "most dangerous" declaration, high-speed police chases have killed over 5,000 innocent bystanders in the United States. "It’s not fair how the police can just go around killing people,” one grieving survivor wrote. “You took an innocent life trying to catch someone else."
These wrecks are quite complex for New York personal injury attorneys. Until recently, the sovereign immunity doctrine, a holdover from the Middle Ages, made it almost impossible to hold government workers accountable when they negligently injure people.
Briefly, back in the Middle Ages, many people believed that kings ruled by divine right. Since they couldn't be wrong and couldn't make mistakes, it was illegal to waste the court's time with a lawsuit.
Several decades ago, New York lawmakers began whittling away at the state's sovereign immunity law. Today, the official immunity doctrine is about all that's left of this law. This doctrine protects police officers in civilian shooting cases. Before they may obtain compensation for their losses, these victims and survivors must first short-circuit the official immunity doctrine.
The official immunity rule also applies to high-speed police chases. As they pursue suspects, officers obviously need not obey all the rules of the road. But when police chases get this reckless, that immunity ends. Some factors to consider include:
Apropos of nothing, at the beginning of the project, the Bourne Identity producers supposedly had about a dozen Mini Coopers. Stunt drivers wrecked almost all of them during filming.
Anti-chase policies, which were mentioned above, sometimes come into play as well. However, these policies usually give officers considerable leeway. For example, the revised Atlanta police chase policy authorizes pursuit if the suspect was associated with a forcible felony, like murder or armed robbery, and the suspect posed an imminent danger to the public. That's a very subjective standard.
A few law enforcement agencies have narrower policies. Additionally, an ad hoc policy could apply. Frequently, dispatchers give orders like "do not pursue" or "use extreme caution when pursuing."
Finally on this point, police chase claims have some additional procedural hurdles. The notice of claim requirement is probably the biggest one. Before these victims can file legal actions, they must file a notice of claim with the city, county, state, or other government entity which employed the reckless officer.
Basically, a notice of claim gives the government a chance to settle these claims quietly before they make the headlines. Typically, the government denies liability in the settlement, but it basically agrees to legally pay hush money. Usually, the agency has thirty days to investigate the claim and make a reasonable settlement offer. If the two sides cannot reach an agreement after they negotiate in good faith, a New York personal injury attorney may file legal paperwork.
One of the real tragedies in this area is that police chases are completely unnecessary. A number of James Bond-like devices are currently available.
Shootable GPS trackers are probably the best example. Using a special gun, an officer shoots a GPS tracker at a suspect's vehicle. A special adhesive permanently bonds the tracker to the vehicle. Then, officers may arrest the suspect in a safer location.
Gadgets like these are very unpopular with many officers. They eliminate the thrill of the chase. Instead, many officers still rely on much more dangerous tactics, like the controversial PIT maneuver. The pursuit intervention technique basically involves ramming a fleeing vehicle so the driver loses control and runs off the road. So, until things change, personal injury attorneys must continue to protect victims and potential victims in these cases.
Injury victims are usually entitled to substantial compensation. For a free consultation with an experienced personal injury attorney in New York, contact the Pianko Law Group, PLLC. You have a limited amount of time to act.