100 mile chase... For failure to signal a lane change?!?

A chase that lasted 100 miles, sometimes at speeds exceeding 100 MPH occurred last Thursday in Missouri. Commentary isn't necessary here, so I'll just post a few excerpts from the Daily Guide story...

Thursday morning was an ordinary day for Officer Derin Richardson when he noticed a Chevrolet Cavalier with two occupants, a man and a woman, that changed lanes on Interstate 44 about 10:34 a.m. without signaling near eastbound mile marker 159 and then ran off the roadway briefly. The Cavalier got off at Exit 161, turned onto Highway Z, and stopped in the parking lot of the Cenex gas station.
Richardson got out of his patrol car and began to walk toward Cavalier. Rather than providing his license and registration, the driver, later identified as Anthony Cesar Hervas, 20, of Chicago, gunned the car’s accelerator and fled.

Next:

St. Robert police have ordered stop sticks for their patrol cars, but Gettys said his department’s officers haven’t yet gone through training to use them and they can’t be used until that training takes place. Multiple efforts were made to use stop sticks to puncture Hervas’ tires but all failed until his Cavalier got several hundred yards across the Franklin County line into St. Louis County.

To continue:

While it’s no more possible to have officers train with 100 mph chases than it is to have officers experience bullets being shot past their heads, Gettys said the hundreds of hours per week spent by officers behind the wheel gives them an intensive familiarity with their vehicle and how it handles, and that can be crucial in a pursuit. “Just driving on a daily basis, their accustomed to driving,” Gettys said. “We’re officers but we’re also human beings so we’re always going to get excited, but our training prepares us for that.”

You can read the entire story HERE.

Police Pursue Seatbelt Violator in Houston

Early Monday morning, the Houston Police Department began pursuing a silver, two-door car through the streets of Houston at dangerously high speeds. The offense? The driver wasn't wearing his seatbelt.

Beginning in North Houston, the chase, which lasted approximately thirty minutes, moved through the Medical Center and the Galleria area - both areas of high pedestrian traffic. At points, the driver of the silver, two-door attempted to evade police by driving on the wrong side of the road. The chase continued on surface streets for sometime before eventually moving onto the freeway. There, the driver weaved in an out of traffic and drove on the shoulder. The chase ended when the suspect swerved, barely missing another car, and careened into a guardrail.

We at PursuitWatch believe this chase to be completely unnecessary. At the time the chase was authorized, the officers thought they were pursuing a suspect for a mere seatbelt violation - hardly warranting possible harm to innocent bystanders. PursuitWatch will be watching this story closely, and we will provide more details as they become available.


Video of the pursuit can be seen here: http://www.khou.com/topstories/stories/khou080623_ac_sloopchase.2f27177b.html

OnStar Technology Demo

This Thursday I will be attending a OnStar Technology Demo to ask questions about their "Stolen Vehicle Slowdown" service. To quote the press release: "Police officers in pursuit of stolen vehicles are often faced with the risk of endangering themselves, innocent bystanders and property. OnStar-equipped vehicles involved in high-speed chases, however, can be slowed remotely, enabling law enforcement officials to apprehend fleeing criminals without risking lives or damaging other vehicles."

We will see what I learn and the true possibilities of this being an effective tool for law enforcement. I will update Thursday afternoon.

Reader responses… The negative

From time to time my inbox gets hit with an email that really lets me have it. Sometimes every bad word in the book is used in order to convey just how wrong we are, how little we know what it’s like "out there", and that we take the side of the bad guys. Some are well thought out with valid concerns and opinions. Those are cherished. Here is a sample of some of the comments I have received recently. Grammar has, for the most part, been corrected.

I could care less what happens to the suspect if they die or get injured so be it who cares it is their own fault. If police are to break off all pursuits because you liberal people believe the crime doesn't warrant a chase, what do you think is going happen? Suspects are going to start to realize that the police are not going to chase them, causing more people to disrespect the law and in fact put more innocent people in harms way...

We are not a bunch of liberals. We have support from citizens and officers representing many political backgrounds. Also, we contest that ‘restrictive’ policies will lead to a criminal free-for-all. We argue that there isn’t a portion of the population on the fence waiting for the department to release their latest policy; rather, people either pull over when asked, or don’t.

How about we try to teach people to stop running from the police that way we don't have any accidents from police chases.....there is a thought.

If this family wouldn't have run from the police then we wouldn't have had this accident now would we???

I agree, but I must ask, how do we do that? So should there be a fourth element to our recommendations? (Honest question, not sarcasm)

1) Proper training
2) Progressive Policy
3) Proper oversight
4) Proper public education?

You guys are stepping away from the problem by criticizing the suspects that "they shouldn't run from the police" but the aim of this site is to focus on safer techniques beyond that point:

Instead it’s people like you that helps make police pursuits more dangerous by focusing on the past then the future. I mean somebody has got to do it. You guys have this mental block that doesn’t let you go "out of the box" on the bad guys shouldn't run quotes I am glad you guys aren't part of my police department with your "trigger happy" attitude.

This one is all over the place, but can be summarized:

“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” – George Santayana

I would like to take a few minutes to comment on some of the ideas I have read on this website. You mention that we as citizens depend on the police to make the decision as to when to pursue or not. Have you ever attempted to make a decision in a matter of seconds concerning a possible life or death situation? It's not as easy as all make it out to be. When the police pursue someone and an accident occurs, it is automatically assumed that the police are at fault. What happens when a police officer activates his blue lights, the violator flees at a high rate of speed, the police officer stops his attempts to take the violator into custody, and a mile down the road the violator hits and kills someone? Is it still the police officers fault that the accident occurred? I think not. However, everyday an agency gets sued for its officers doing just that. It's a catch 22 for police in this country. The public wants the police to protect them and at times give their lives for them. But when something happens that they don't necessarily like the public is the first to point fingers at law enforcement. Consider your wife or child is involved in an incident where a suspect strikes their vehicle and then attempts to leave the scene. Your family member is injured in the collision. There is a witness who calls the police and gives a description of the suspect vehicle. The police get behind it, blue light it, and the vehicle flees. The police cease all law enforcement action and resume normal patrol functions. Later that night your family member dies as a result of the injuries sustained in the hit and run accident. This is a circumstance where the hit and run is a misdemeanor in most states. Therefore, a pursuit is not warranted by most policies. Your family member is dead and there is no one to answer for the crime they committed which caused the death.

In most all instances the hands of the police are tied as to what they can do in given situations. This is no more apparent than in the police pursuit aspect of law enforcement. I do not agree that all violators should be pursued. A minor traffic offense does not add up to the dangers of pursuing a vehicle. However, the person driving the car with the broken taillight that flees might be the person who just killed 10 people at a mall just because he felt like it.

No one knows what the life of a police officer is like unless they have been one. People are quick to place blame on the police rather than the criminals they are chasing.

No, I have never had to make a decision in a matter of seconds concerning a possible life or death situation. You’re right, it isn’t easy. In fact, its difficulty is what justifies a progressive police policy. You are making my argument for me and I sincerely thank you.

You mention the case where a witness gives a description of a vehicle and suspect and the police attempt to pull it over but it flees. The police are restricted from chasing. That does not mean the suspect will get away. Through the description of the witness, the potential to obtain a license plate number, and various other methods, police can still catch the bad guy. In other words, just because the suspect leaves the sight of the pursing officer does not mean the suspect gets away with the crime!

You say the “person driving the car with the broken taillight that flees might be the person who just killed 10 people at a mall just because he felt like it.” I guess that is possible. But if you accept that statement, you must also accept that the person with the broken taillight that flees might be the stupid kid who doesn’t want his parents to be mad because he just got a ticket, right?

Again, you are right that no one knows what the life of a police officer is like unless they have been one. Much the same, no one knows what it is like to have an innocent family member killed as a result of a police pursuit.

Too bad when that same guy kills those two sisters after the police end the chase, everyone is still up in arms because now the police "ENDED IT TOO SOON".

Police can never seem to please the public who can sit back and "Monday morning quarterback" the whole situation. I would like to see the average citizen doing the extraordinary tasks that these officers do, the average citizen couldn't deal with the bloodshed and anguish that police officers deal with on a daily basis. They would go insane.

These officers feel bad enough already with someone telling them they screwed up, because guess what THEY ALREADY KNOW. They were already called into the police chiefs office and scolded, trust me I have been there.

We never doubt the sincerity of police officers unless certain evidence shows otherwise. Officers who are involved in a pursuit in which one of their own or an innocent victim is killed must live with that reality. It can’t be easy. However, just because it is a hard job does not mean we accept the status quo. It does not mean we simply say, well, “It’s part of the job.” It does not mean we don’t investigate, train, critique, and strive for perfection.

What is the job of a Police Officer? Well where to start. The jobs of a police officer is what it should say, considering that the "general public" expects them to be pretty much everything. It's their job to be a counselor, a teacher, a role model for children, a parent to the children that people don’t feel like raising, a preacher, a walking target, a trained fighter, a lawyer and plenty of other things. They have the jobs that no one in the world should have to have. They have the jobs that no one else wants. Chase a drunk driver and if they crash it's the officers fault, however 1800 people a year are killed by drunk drivers that are not being chased by officers. Chase an armed suspect and crash and it's the officers fault, however 10000 people a year are killed by people we are chasing to prevent them from killing again. Let's be realistic. If a police officer dies on duty it's part of the job, if a so called "innocent person" dies while police area chasing the bad guy, it's a tragedy. Police Pursuits are dangerous, and I wish they didn’t have to take place, but letting most people go so they can hurt someone else and get away with it. That's a lot more dangerous. Let me ask the real question, "Just what is the job of a citizen?" Of course I do mean other than to hate the police instead of the bad guys. I hope I answered your question, because it is in my opinion a question that no one in their right mind should ever ask.

This one is one of my favorites. In response to my query into the job of a police officer, this reader began by offering a true answer describing the sacrifices our officers make. Then it gets a bit odd. “Chase a drunk driver and if they crash it's the officers fault, however 1800 people a year are killed by drunk drivers that are not being chased by officers. Chase an armed suspect and crash and it's the officers fault, however 10000 people a year are killed by people we are chasing to prevent them from killing again.” I have no idea where the numbers are coming from, much less what they mean. According to MADD, over 16,000 Americans died in 2004 in alcohol related automobile crashes. Is he saying that of that 16,000, 1,800 were already asked to pull over by L.E. but refused, and later killed someone or themselves? Next, I have no idea what the talk of the 10,000 that are killed that we are trying to chase… Or something like that, means.

The writer continues, wondering why anyone with their right mind should ever ask such a question. Should I not care about the safety of those officers who put their life on the line every day? Should I not ask why Deputies Donta Manuel and Jonathan Wallace had to die? Should we just accept things as they are?

Your right, it's time to do a bit of research. Everyone knows that thousands of police departments and police officers don’t know as much as a guy who went to two low rate schools for a degree in Political Science. Oh yeah wait, every officer already has one of those degrees. Do some research is right, research how many "bad guys" go to jail because of police pursuits vs. how many "good guys" get hurt. Then research how many people the "bad guys" who get caught have hurt and then do the math. You may hurt 2000 people a year in pursuits, but you save about 20000 by getting those "bad guys" off the street. Research how many college students kill people in crashes a year...maybe they just shouldn’t be allowed to drive. Better yet research many training hours police officers have, like you said, then add in the hours a year they work, then add the drive time up and then OT, plus the school time and realize that they put over 3/4 of an average lifetime towards protecting jerks who will devote their lives to criticizing their every move, but will never have the guts to go out on the streets and do what the real "good guys" do.

And last but certainly not least, we have this one. It is in response to a question I asked regarding amount of time spent vehicle training in comparison to firearm training. It was rather rhetorical question considering all departments devote more training to firearms then to driving, but nonetheless. After sifting through the grammatical errors, I paused to take it in.

“Everyone knows that thousands of police departments and police officers don’t know as much as a guy who went to two low rate schools for a degree in Political Science.”

Thanks!

I find it interesting that this gentleman tells me to go do some research all the while throwing out all sorts of numbers with absolutely nothing to back them up. I can do that too. Actually, I’ll create a Mad Lib, and you can just go back and fill in whatever numbers make you happy!

Sure police pursuits hurt ______ people a year but if they don’t chase the bad guys then _____ more people will be brutally murdered! Also, if we don’t pursue everyone then _____ more banks will be robed and _____ more cars will be stolen and the world will dip into chaos and anarchy.

I’ve come to understand that this sort of reaction comes with the territory. I remember an email Jim Phillips received from an angry officer who said that if he was on duty and came across my father and his family in dire need, he would let us die. I imagine it is easy for that officer to say such things while hiding behind a keyboard, anonymous to the world. We, however, are putting our faces out there and attempting to make the streets safe for both citizens and law enforcement.

But a majority of comments are positive and reinforcing. More on those in the days to come.

Yuma PD: On the right track

More and more departments around the nation are getting on track and adopting progressive policies that take into consideration the safety of officers, the innocent public, and even fleeing suspect. I came across this editorial from the Yuma (Arizona) Sun:

The YPD's pursuit policy is 14 pages long, but can be boiled down to one basic tenet: Don't engage in a pursuit unless it is a very serious situation. Chases for misdemeanor offenses - like beer theft - or civil traffic violations are specifically prohibited.

That means there are few pursuits by Yuma police officers.

Chases are allowed for felony offenses when it is seen as necessary and there is a reasonable chance of apprehension or if there is the imminent threat of injury or death to others.

Read the entire opinion piece HERE.

Although PursuitWatch supports limiting pursuits to only violent crimes, this is a step in the right direction. We can truthfully discuss the level of felony worthy of a pursuit, but everyone ought to agree on the stupidity of pursuing for minor crimes.

Driver training stops after the academy...

Our friend, Ron Kelley, was recently featured in a story by KSDK concerning police vehicle training in Illinois and Missouri.

Ron Kelley has been in law enforcement for the past 27 years and is affiliated with the Association of Law Enforcement Emergency Response Trainers and the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association. He travels the country teaching advanced driving classes to police and troopers.

"If they have not had any training since they were in the academy, Leisa, humans resort back to bad habits. They become complacent. They need to be reminded," Kelley said. "Eighty percent of their career is behind the wheel of a vehicle and operating at very high speeds. That training needs to be emphasized."

Kimberly Cochran, ISP Academy Commander, does not agree with Kelley's philosophy.

"We don't do the driving because the officers use that skill every day. They drive over 45 million miles a year and they use those skills daily," Cochran said.

Unfortunately, Kimberly Cochran isn't right. Do officers us the PIT maneuver daily? Do they deploy stop sticks daily? Do they practice proper communication and strategy of a pursuit with fellow officers daily? Exactly.

You can read the full story HERE. There is also an accompanying video.

GPS and OnStar: No exception to sound policy

Last October, GM announced that 19 of its new models would be equipped with the technology, through OnStar, that would allow law enforcement to ask the engines of cars they were pursuing to be remotely shut off. The idea is that this would bring a safe and quick end to these situations. Around the same time, the LAPD was testing StarChase, a devise mounted on patrol cars that shoots a GPS tracking devise that sticks to fleeing cars. Considering Los Angeles had over 600 pursuits last year, any new testing is a welcomed idea. Both StarChase and the OnStar products use state of the art technologies which no one could have imagined years earlier would be possible. Fox News, the USA Today, and CBS News called, wanting to know what I thought about these exciting new technologies.

They asked: “Do you support these technologies?” Yes, I support all technologies that might make the job of law enforcement safer and more effective. Much like the two-way radio, helicopter, and the computer have helped police protect their communities, StarChase and OnStar might once prove as important as those previously mentioned. I understand that when an officer engages in a pursuit of a suspect, he or she is putting their life in danger every time. If these technologies make it possible for more officers to go home safe to their families every evening, then let us see if it works.

“Will it make pursuits a thing of the past?” They continued, adding “If police had this technology in 2001, would your sister still be alive?” I can answer both of these questions at once: I don’t know.

But this is what I do know, that the potential for these technological advancements does not take the place of safe and smart policy. First, the costs of these new technologies are high, and with the already incredibly stretched budgets of out nations departments, don’t expect to see devices on your local patrol cars that can shoot a GPS tracker onto a suspects car anytime soon. The StarChase technology requires the suspect vehicle to be either stopped or going very slow at a close range. What if the patrol car doesn’t get anywhere near the suspects car? Let us also not forget that this new OnStar technology will only be included on a small fraction of the vehicles out there. Chances are this wont be an option in the vast majority of situations for many years.

Some have come to me, including The Economist, wondering what I thought about the civil liberties implications of these new technologies. Could these devices be easily abused? Would this allow law enforcement to always know what I’m doing? Is this Big Brother? This is not my place to comment. However, this side of the debate shows even more so the need for clear and defined policy that lets officers know what can and can’t be done. Hopefully, a policy that clearly states the wrongs and rights of these technologies can cut down on cases that might bring civil liberties issues into question.

So, until that time, all departments should adopt a policy that requires adequate training for police officers, only pursues those who are suspected of committing violent crimes, allows for complete and painstaking review of all incidents, and makes available to the public all requested information. Until this becomes common practice, these technologies are no more than a story in the newspaper.

Fleeing suspects crash into wall in Orange County

According to the Orlando Sentinel, when two men were pulled over and questioned about their potential involvement in an armed robbery, they sped off at a high rate of speed. Shortly after, the Sheriff's Department's helicopter spotted a vehicle matching the description that had crashed into a brick wall.

The men were arrested for fleeing from deputies, but investigators did not confirm if the two men were responsible for the armed robbery. The victim in that crime told deputies the robbers were wearing masks, reports show.

No word on what exactly transpired from when the suspects decided to flee till they crashed into the brick wall.

Continue to the Orlando Sentinel story HERE.

Questions remain in Snohomish County

Did the officer involved in a pursuit that led to the death of the fleeing suspect, an 18 year-old high school student, use the PIT maneuver?

Was it justified in this case?

Herald Writer Jackson Holtz asked Ron Kelley, a friend of PursuitWatch, his opinion:

The PIT generally is most effective between 25 and 45 mph, said Ron Kelley, a retired police driving instructor from the Osceola County Sheriff's Office, near Orlando, Fla.

Anything slower and the car being bumped doesn't have enough force to stall out when spun around, he said. At higher speeds the results are unpredictable.

Police haven't said how fast Privrasky was driving when the deputy attempted the PIT.

Nakao said he was driving behind the chase, which was moving fast.

"It's not every day you see a police chase like that," Nakao said.

He said he saw Privrasky's car leave the road and couldn't tell whether the deputy made contact with the car.

As police reconstruct the crash, they'll likely weigh everything the deputy had to take into consideration that night before attempting the PIT, Kelley said.

While the retired deputy is careful not to second-guess the deputy's decision, questions remain unanswered.

While the pursuit started because Privrasky was speeding, it became a felony when he did not pull over for the officer and tried to flee. Sheriff's deputies are allowed to chase vehicles only when a felony has been committed.

Kelley wondered whether Privasky's initial speeding warranted the risk of using the PIT, or could there have been another option? "Could he have been identified and arrested a later time at a later place?" he asked.

Captain Travis Yates of the Tulsa PD, another friend of PursuitWatch, was also quoted:

The PIT maneuver is an effective way to stop the bad guys, said Travis Yates, a captain with the Tulsa (Okla.) Police Department who runs PoliceDriving.com.

Like any police tool, it's not without some risk to both the pursued and the police, said Yates, who is considered an expert on PIT maneuvers.

"Anytime a law enforcement action ends in a fatality, it's a tragedy on both sides," Yates said. "We have to always remember that police don't go out on the streets and intend on going on pursuits. For some reason some people decide they want to flee."

Click HERE to read the whole story...

Greensboro News Record

The deaths of Linsay and Maggie Lunsford in early December are still being felt in North Carolina. The following editorial quoted Jim Phillips, founder of PursuitWatch.

Linsay Lunsford looked like she had a great future. Passionate about community service, the 18-year-old had moved to Greensboro in 2007 to attend UNCG to become an elementary school teacher. But a trip to Creedmoor on Dec. 1 to see family proved fatal. She was killed in a crash with a man fleeing from Franklinton police. The man, Guy Christopher Ayscue, high on cocaine, also was killed. So was Lunsford's nine-year-old sister, Maggie.

It's impossible to know if the sisters' deaths could have been avoided. Ayscue was being pursued because he had been driving on the wrong side of the road. Still, as Jim Phillips, the late founder of Pursuitwatch.org, said, "A drunk at 40 mph is much less dangerous than a drunk at 80 mph."

Pursuitwatch is just one of several Web sites dedicated to improving the safety of high-speed police chases. Such sites often are started, as Pursuitwatch was, by people left bereft after having an innocent family member killed as a result of a high-speed police chase. As reporter Ryan Seals' Sunday story in the News & Record pointed out, such deaths take place on a daily basis across America, with thousands injured annually because of them.

Click HERE to continue.