|
Most local, county and state law enforcement agencies give officers wide discretion when it comes to the question of when to initiate a pursuit. Officers are required to use their best judgment and to consider the potential harm to people and property before engaging in a chase.
"It is impossible to develop guidelines to cover every conceivable situation which may occur," said Col. W. Steven Flaherty, a Virginia State Police superintendent. "Therefore, it is important that each officer exercise their best judgment fully utilizing their training, experience and common sense."
Col. Henry W. Stanley Jr., Henrico, Virginia’s police chief agrees.
"The decision to initiate a pursuit is a difficult one," he told the Richmond Times Dispatch newspaper in a recent interview. "The decision to terminate a pursuit is even more difficult. Professional judgment and common sense are the determining factors."
While most departments require officers to consider things like the weather, road and traffic conditions, the location, the seriousness of the offense and time of day, no agency in the state of Virginia sets absolute rules on speeds, distances or locations for a pursuit.
"The decision of the violator to disregard the signal of a law-enforcement officer is often lost in the analysis of pursuits," Hanover Sheriff V. Stuart Cooktold the Richmond Times Dispatch. "The reality is, in many cases the violator was already driving in a manner that endangered the public when the officers made the initial observations. The alternative would be to do nothing when faced with threats to our community."
Chief Stanley said pursuits have inherent risks similar to other police duties and the department tries to strike a balance between the public's safety and enforcing the law.
"If someone robs a bank and the police officer confronts the perpetrator at the door, should the officer let the perpetrator escape or attempt to capture them at gunpoint?" Stanley asked. "There is always a risk in any gunfire exchange that an innocent bystander might be hurt or killed. The same holds true in a pursuit situation."
But a growing number of police departments across the country have imposed new restrictions on pursuits, which has significantly reduced the number of casualties. In many cases, the policy changed after a high-profile crash involving bystanders.
Kansas City, Missouri; Baltimore, Maryland,; Columbus, Ohio; Memphis, Tennessee; Los Angeles; Detroit; Austin, Texas; and Milwaukee, have rewritten their policies to permit chases only for violent felonies or when there is a clear and immediate danger to the public.
The police department in Orlando, Florida, allows officers to engage in pursuits only when a driver has committed or attempted to commit a violent forcible felony. The policy lists 11 crimes, including murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, armed carjacking and burglary with a firearm. Orlando's directive prohibits chasing drivers for misdemeanor criminal offenses or traffic violations. If those drivers attempt to flee, Orlando officers must actually stop, turn off their lights and sirens and turn their cruisers around to defuse a chase.
"The whole point of the policy is to balance and weigh the offense with the risk to the people who are going to be involved, including the public," Orlando police spokeswoman Sgt. Barbara Jones told the Richmond Times Dispatch. "It is a high-liability area, and the risk to the public is huge."
The Baltimore PD has banned all vehicle pursuits, but it has four helicopters that can chase suspects from the air for any reason.
Geoffrey P. Alpert, a national expert on high-risk law-enforcement activities who advises police departments on pursuits, said the more that people learn about chases, the less they support them.
"I, like most of the public, believed that a police pursuit was a necessary tactic and it was something that police officers were certainly justified in using to catch people who fled from them," Alpert told reporters. He’s a professor of criminology and criminal justice at the University of South Carolina who has studied pursuits for more than 20 years. He now is a firm believer that pursuits can be justified only in cases involving violent felons.
"So I started getting in and looking at the facts behind that belief - the number of injuries, the numbers of deaths, the dollars spent and the benefit, which of course is very minimal - it just turned me around," Albert said.
"I think you see the more progressive departments restricting their policies," he said, "and the less professional and progressive ones keeping the old, very, very vague policies of the 1980s."
Many police leaders disagree, saying it would be dangerous to limit pursuits to the nature of the violation. Many point out the danger to the public that a drunk driver represents and question the wisdom of telling cops not to chase such violators. But Alpert disagrees with that view entirely.
"To allow suspected DUI violators to continue would only raise the death rate and risk for the public," he said. Depending on the circumstances chasing drunken drivers rather than arresting them after they stop somewhere may actually increase the danger to innocent bystanders.
"If the reason you're pulling him over is because he's not driving well at 40 mph, and now he's going 90 mph in a chase, what do you think is going to happen? The chance of a crash is enormous." Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites        
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed