So, steal a car, have the police chase you and then sue them for the resulting crash?

[Nerph-]

I don't have to pick, the law picks for me. This isn't about what you THINK is right and wrong, this is about an established code that intends upon the utmost of fairness for everyone. Kill two people versus RISK killing a bystander? Still an obvious choice.

The police didn't intentionally kill them. There wasn't a 100% chance they would be killed. Therefore what you said was incorrect. It was either risk killing the people in the car doing the PIT move, or risk bystanders being killed by the thieves. The first option being the obvious choice to chose. If you're going to counter argument, at least get it right.

[aztr0]

If he gets 10 mil for this, I wonder how many lawsuits we're going to see pop up just by watching all those "Wildest Police Chase" videos on TV.

[Lysah]

The police didn't intentionally kill them. There wasn't a 100% chance they would be killed. Therefore what you said was incorrect. It was either risk killing the people in the car doing the PIT move, or risk bystanders being killed by the thieves. The first option being the obvious choice to chose. If you're going to counter argument, at least get it right.

Hindsight is always nice like that, isn't it. And you raise a decent point, however, I don't know enough about what actually happened to produce any real risk assessment. I would be willing to bet that what the police did was far riskier to human life, but, that would be hearsay I suppose.

I don't really care what the law does with this, I just wish people would think for once, rather than just feeling everything.

[Falrinn]

We need to distinguish "Is suing" and "has successfully sued".

Anyone can file a lawsuit for any reason. That's just how the system is set up, and there's no real way around it that doesn't also block unusual but completely legitimate lawsuits.

In all likelihood the police department will successfully defend themselves if they don't end up settling out of court for a much smaller amount.

[Oratory]

I'm wondering if we all are reading the same article here. No where did I see a speed listed for the Echo or whether it was on a high way or residential zone. This article is lacking in key points of information I would need to pass judgement on the police's actions. Don't just assume he was going 60 in a residential zone. He could have been going 40 in a wooded area and was PITed off into a tree. I'll wait on more details before I decide what's excessive.

Edit:
I watched the actual video and it doesn't look like a wooded area but I still have no idea whether Chevy Chase Circle is residential or not.

The article from the crash a month ago does say "high-speed chase" and Google Maps shows it to be a residential area.

[Tricksterjim]

Anyone can file a law suit. This case is still in the preliminary stages, and may not even make it to the jury/judge.

[Deleted]

LOL dumbasses. They should have stopped the car. They resisted, it's their own fault.

[Deleted]

If it was truly ridiculous, he would lose the case.

Funny how that works.

Edit:
I only read the first few lines, but from my completely informed view, it sounds like they caused a crash chasing him that killed both of his friends and severely injured him. Yes, they should probably be sued for that. For the same reason, they can't shoot him repeatedly in the legs just because he's running, they'd get sued for that as well.

Catching someone who stole an inanimate object and killing two people in the process - TOTALLY WORTH IT.

Or, they could stop when the police asks you to stop, or when they start chasing you. Nah, who am I kidding IT'S THE POLICE RUUUUUUUUUUUUN!!!!!

[nefz]

I don't have to pick, the law picks for me. This isn't about what you THINK is right and wrong, this is about an established code that intends upon the utmost of fairness for everyone. Kill two people versus RISK killing a bystander? Still an obvious choice.

"Kill two people..." Did they shoot them in the back? Or what? Do you honestly think that the police should just have let them drive on, in traffic endangering everyone including _themselves_. Or do you think they didn't endanger anyone with their flight. The police have their orders to stop fleeing cars for a reason you know.

[karrad]

The driver of the car is the one responsible for the deaths due to his failure to comply. From the evidence i've seen the officer was just following procedure.

[Deleted]

and I'm going to say this also.
Only in America.
Its the only place I see this stupid crap happening.
(Mods I am a born and raised American myself, so I'm not hating but its truth we are the only country i hear about things from, show me evidence of this stupid stuff happening elsewhere and I'll gladly take it back, but as it stands we are a country of greedy retards.)

Can't show you any evidence, but I remember a similar thing happening in Sweden a few years ago, where a guy and his girlfriend was fleeing from the police on a motorcycle, going at a ridiculous speed, something like 200 km/h (around 130 MPH) and crashed in to a wall, instantly killing the guy, while his girlfriend survived. She later blamed the police for chasing them, because apparently that forced them to go at such high speed to get away.

[Jarlathe]

The driver of the car is the one responsible for the deaths due to his failure to comply. From the evidence i've seen the officer was just following procedure.

After reading the article that Oratory posted from the original crash, the cop should have been given a medal. He saved the driver and the one suing and tried to save the other two but was overcome by the flames.

Maybe this idiot should sue the one that's really at fault here (the driver), but we all know he doesn't have the 10million or the insurance the city does.

[artemishunter1]

The police car did not ram the stolen car. Police has the right to chase even in such crimes or else how am i going to get my car back? or should police tell go off car thiefs?

[smelltheglove]

if this was successful, why would anybody ever stop when they see blue lights? and as has been said, anybody can sue over anything. i can sue mmochampion for not providing me with an egg mcmuffin every morning. i wouldnt win, but i could bring the suit

[Stasis007]

Meh. If the Police caused the deaths by ramming them into a tree, like the suit says, then they deserve to get their asses sued. If the Police didn't kill them by ramming them into a tree, like the Police say, then the evidence will prove this and the suit will be unsuccessful.

And bear in mind, the Police were chasing a bunch of kids in a car they 'believed was stolen'. Not bank robbers and murderers.

[Poppincaps]

I love how some of you are assuming that they would've killed someone... First of all, nowhere in the article did it say that they were going 100 miles in a suburban area or anything like that. Also, in my state the police have to give up the chase once the criminal goes fast enough, because there is a great risk to the officers and other's lives. If the kids noticed the police were no longer chasing them, then they would've probably slowed down. I am in no way excusing them from their actions, but I do think the officers went a little too far.

[Alraml]

If it was truly ridiculous, he would lose the case.

Funny how that works.

Edit:
I only read the first few lines, but from my completely informed view, it sounds like they caused a crash chasing him that killed both of his friends and severely injured him. Yes, they should probably be sued for that. For the same reason, they can't shoot him repeatedly in the legs just because he's running, they'd get sued for that as well.

Catching someone who stole an inanimate object and killing two people in the process - TOTALLY WORTH IT.

Isn't that just his fault for resisting arrest?

The problem is there's no respect for the law unless it suits their own agenda.

[kel]

fucking US.. learn to get a propper system..

omg, so much comments cant be made... must resist...

[Shadowmelded]

I love how some of you are assuming that they would've killed someone... First of all, nowhere in the article did it say that they were going 100 miles in a suburban area or anything like that. Also, in my state the police have to give up the chase once the criminal goes fast enough, because there is a great risk to the officers and other's lives. If the kids noticed the police were no longer chasing them, then they would've probably slowed down. I am in no way excusing them from their actions, but I do think the officers went a little too far.

That's kind of what I thought as well. I mean not back off as in let them go but back off enough that they won't do anything irrational and in the mean time try and block off their escape routes, pop their tyres or hope they ruin out of gas. In fact I thought the reason they didn't do PIT's more often was because they know how dangerous they can be even if preformed correctly.

[Sinraye]

LOL dumbasses. They should have stopped the car. They resisted, it's their own fault.

Well since the driver was a 16 year old you can't exactly expect him act like an average adult. A 16 year old is still just a kid. Its possible they didn't want face their parents if they got caught and therefore tried to make a break for it. Sure they did wrong but they are still kids.