Personal Injury Law

Police Chases: Why Do The Police Always Deny Their Mistakes?

Having handled police chase cases for over a decade, I have yet to see a case in which the police admitted wrongdoing when a high speed pursuit turned out badly. Obviously, when a high speed pursuit ends in tragedy and someone is killed or seriously injured, the police know that immediately. In cases where the pursuit should not have been initiated and/or continued, the wagons are then circled and numerous explanations and rationalizations are provided as to why the police were merely ?doing their duty? and were doing absolutely nothing wrong. Many times this is exactly the case. The police were doing their duty and they were doing nothing wrong and had every right to be chasing a dangerous offender who may have committed a forcible felony as an example. However, in many other cases, the police have done something wrong. That is, they were exposing the public to great risk of serious injury or death with virtually no need to chase the offender (such as situations involving missing tail lights or minor petty or misdemeanor offenses) and the pursuit then ?turned out badly.? In situations where the police are chasing minor offenders at high rates of speed on congested roadways the danger to the public always will always outweigh the need to apprehend the suspect. And yet, in such circumstances, when the pursuit ends in tragedy, the police will ?have done nothing wrong? and were merely ?doing their duty.? The wrong was committed by the fleeing suspect, not the police so they will say. But the suspect (a minor transgressor) was no serious danger to anyone until they were chased.

The rationalizations we often see in these cases are that ?the pursuit had not begun, we were merely trying to catch up to the suspect.? By offering this rationalization the police hope to convince the public that they did not violate their pursuit policies because they were not actually in a pursuit. Another common defense is that ?we were not in pursuit, we are acting in emergency mode attempting to warn the public up ahead of the dangers presented by the motorist.? Another rationalization is ?we had no intent to immediately apprehend the suspect,? meaning that if we did not have an intent to apprehend, we could not have been in pursuit but were merely following the vehicle. Indeed, ?following the vehicle? or ?tailing? the vehicle is another rationalization offered rather than ?pursuing the vehicle.? Another defense: ?it was the officer?s discretion? under the policy to chase or not to chase. (Therefore, he can never be wrong). Another defense: we had terminated the pursuit and had resumed normal speed. (Videotapes are often missing when this one is used). The rationalizations and explanations are endless but having practiced in this area for many years, the point to be made is that according to themselves the police very rarely do anything wrong, even in those situations where they do.

Regrettably, the natural human instinct to deny wrongdoing when a mistake has been made is what is preventing change in this area. Nothing will change unless the parties who have made the mistakes acknowledge their mistakes and learn from them. As long as rationalizations and explanations are offered necessary change will not occur and the innocent will continue to die. Regrettably, in this particular field, police chases continue unabated with hundreds of innocent people dying annually and thousands of others being seriously injured. Until and unless the law enforcement community is willing to admit that they sometimes have made mistakes, they will never learn from them and the innocent public will continue to pay the price for them.

To err is human. Police sometimes err just as well as we all do. The law enforcement community needs to admit its errors in these cases if lives are to be saved. Otherwise, we can count on more deaths and injuries in needlessly reckless and dangerous police pursuits where the danger presented to the public by the suspect is outweighed by the dangers of the chase itself.

Full post as published by Georgia Injury Lawyer Blog on May 31, 2008 (boomark / email).