Pursuits
... to the U.S. Customs Service, a pursuit is justified when “the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect presents an imminent threat of serious physical injury or death to others; the suspect has committed, or is attempting to commit, a serious crime; or the necessity of immediately stopping the suspect outweighs the level of danger created by the pursuit” (U.S. Dept. of Treasury, 2000). However, it appears that many high-speed pursuits that have occurred in the past don’t meet these guidelines. “The most dangerous police chases are often initiated—and proceed for lengthy periods—for traffic violations or other minor offense, rather than felonies. A study of the California Highway Patrol from 1933-1995 reveals that only 12.9% of pursuits involved suspects accused of serious violent crime” (Berg, 1995). Once an officer has determined that a pursuit is justified, he/she must evaluate all outside factors. These can include: weather conditions, road surfaces, patrol vehicle vs. suspect vehicle, and the officers record. Perhaps most important of the necessary factors are those involving the public. These would include the location of the pursuit, be it an urban, suburban, or rural area. Next they must look at the volume of vehicle as well as pedestrian traffic in the area. Is it an off-peak travel time, or is it rush hour? Are there buildings in the area that have the potential to house and subsequently release many pedestrians at once, ie: churches & schools? Ideally, an officer will weigh the severity of offense, the possibility of threat to others, and all the necessary precautionary factors to make an educated decision on whether or not to pursue. However, officers still make mistakes in this field. Certain training and policy changes have been recommended throughout the country to better prepare officers and their departments for police pursuits. These include: “1) Invoke a state-wide policy in high-speed pursuits, consistent with state laws. 2) Require periodic practical and classroom training for officers. 3) Conduct formal investigations of all cases resulting in personal injury or property damage. 4) Reduce department officials’ implicit encouragement of high-speed pursuits” (Berg, 1995). Results of High-Speed Pursuits The purpose of any type of police pursuit, be it on foot or vehicle, is to safely apprehend the suspect. While high-speed pursuits may be considered dangerous, they have proven to be effective. “A 1993 study of the California Highway Patrol found that of all the high-speed pursuits reported that year, 77% of suspects were apprehended, and 70% of the pursuits ended without an accident” (Travis, 1996). Unfortunately for law enforcement officials, though, the negative statistics far outweigh the above-mentioned positive statistics. According to Travis, in the report published by the National Institute of Justice: · A collision of some sort can be expected to occur in 32% of all pursuits. · Of all pursuit-related personal injuries and deaths, 70% involve occupants of the suspect vehicle, 14% involve the law enforcement officer(s), and 15%, innocent, uninvolved parties. · A fatality will occur in 1.2% of police pursuits. (Travis, 1996). With these numbers in mind, it appears as if the general consensus is correct in saying that high-speed police pursuits are dangerous to everyone, and that some sort of action must be taken to either eliminate or appropriately change them. Another dangerous aspect of high-speed pursuits often goes unmentioned: lawsuits against the responsible police departments. Many times throughout the years, department officials as well as the individual officer have been brought to trial over accidents resulting from high-speed pursuits. This not only damages the image and the morale of the department, it also affects the taxpayers. If a department is sued and is forced to pay a settlement, they will inevitably need more money from the taxpayers to continue operating at their current status. Alternatives to High-Speed Pursuits The majority of research and professional literature, not to mention the general public, has concluded that high-speed pursuits are dangerous and create more risks than benefits. With that in mind, alternatives to these pursuits have been proposed over the years, and in some cases, are already being utilized. The most common of the alternatives is often referred to as the “spike strip”. There are 2 different types of this device. The first is the standard barrier strip, a length of cord with metallic barbs attached. Once placed across a roadway, no other vehicles may pass without incurring damage. When the suspect vehicle passes over, the barbs shred the tires, hopefully stopping the vehicle. The second is the “Retractable Spiked Barrier Strip”, and it can be laid out well in advance of the suspect vehicle. Unlike the typical spike strip, it is placed across the roadway with the spikes retracted, thus allowing innocent vehicles to pass over it without any harm. The strip is activated as the intended vehicle passes over, and it embeds hollow spikes in the tires, allowing for a uniform escape of air. This allows the vehicle to come to a controlled stop. Auto Arrestor sys...