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

[Jarlathe]

Nice legal system. 10 million dollars for being part of a crime.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/lo...149369525.html

[Soisoisoi]

Welcome to 2012, where you sue the police for chasing criminals down and causing a crash before they kill someone, and fireman can't go in ankle-deep water to save people for their own health and safety.

[Orodoth]

ugh... seriously? Its sad that people will sue over just about anything these days, but its absolutely PATHETIC that the lawsuits are humored in a court of law, and sometimes actually yield in the favor of the plaintiff... WTF

I hope this kid doesn't get diddly squat, except for a stay in juvenile detainment for a bit.

[saberon]

the police say that the chase was in keeping with standard law enforcement procedure. richardson's attorney's argue that such pursuits should be limited to serious suspected crimes.

or they could just not steal a fucking car.

[Lysah]

The law is blind and impartial, it has to operate under very exact circumstances to work. It's either this or massive corruption and totalitarianism.

[Ghâzh]

The law is blind and impartial, it has to operate under very exact circumstances to work. It's either this or massive corruption and totalitarianism.

Yeah, not. There's plenty of good examples about working law systems in europe that do not include such ridiculousness as seen here.

[Catta]

Only... in... NO! MUST RESIST!

[Temp name]

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


Infraction: Nation-bashing

[Lysah]

Yeah, not. There's plenty of good examples about working law systems in europe that do not include such ridiculousness as seen here.

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.

[stopbeingdumb]

Must resist urge, to go off on a tangent about race issues.

Seriously though, this is rediculous. I can't even comprehend how this is possible, i really wonder what the make up of the jury was. 100% african american?


Infracted: Please, refrain from making racist comments.

[Soisoisoi]

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

You have to remember they could have killed innocent people by running them over if the police didn't stop them. That's basically the reason they ram people off of the roads in the first place, to save innocent people.

They were kids, already involved in stupid things, no doubt they had no idea how to control the vehicle properly either, and obviously were running from the police as they didn't stop. Who would you rather RISK killing, criminals or innocent people? You pick.

[cherb]

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.

its procedure to PIT maneuver a car if they refuse to stop during a police chase....their own fault for commiting grand theft auto and then evading police after the fact

[Asmekiel]

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

They could start with not stealing a car. Or in this event, stop when asked instead of racing away.

[Lysah]

You have to remember they could have killed innocent people by running them over if the police didn't stop them. That's basically the reason they ram people off of the roads in the first place, to save innocent people.

They were kids, already involved in stupid things, no doubt they had no idea how to control the vehicle properly either, and obviously were running from the police as they didn't stop. Who would you rather RISK killing, criminals or innocent people? You pick.

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.

[KeirAdish]

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.

Well, they can't exactly stop someone from dying if the car wrecks now can they?
I don't believe they have super human powers where the car crashes and they just will it to happen that nobody die???

Especially if none of them gave the other care the bumps and such that is procedure to do in a chase and they still crashed into a tree.

and in all honestly, if you're driving around in a stolen vehicle and not pulling over when they police are following with their lights on then you are kinda retarded and don't deserve much at that point...
that is unless ya know, the car isn't stolen and you know beyond a reasonable doubt this officer plans to cause you bodily harm.


*edit* Kill two criminals, or risk killing the mother walking with her children that happen to be crossing the street when they criminals passed and hit killing all of them.
Easy choice for me, shove a missile up the cars rear end

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.)

[Soisoisoi]

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.

Yeah, RISK (PIT usually doesn't kill them, remember that) killing the two people who have broken the law, instead of a random innocent person (or more). And that's exactly why the 'law' is stupid currently.

[Karnell]

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.

[Jarlathe]

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.)

Oh,we had a run of this kinda stupid shit up here in Canada, early 90's mostly in Toronto.

[Lysah]

Yeah, RISK (PIT usually doesn't kill them, remember that) killing the two people who have broken the law, instead of a random innocent person (or more). And that's exactly why the 'law' is stupid currently.

Because it doesn't completely bend over to what you personally think makes sense, and instead follows a strict written and documented code that has been decided upon by a huge amount of people over a huge amount of years? That's what makes it stupid?

[skrump]

The law is blind and impartial, it has to operate under very exact circumstances to work. It's either this or massive corruption and totalitarianism.

Not true. Courtrooms should be set up like American Idol, Everyone in the room should have a little device to vote guilty/non guilty and then choose the option they like best as a punishment from a set list of options which includes the ability to vote for no punishment.

Nobody knows what should be the law better than the the people themselves anyway and it is a dam shame that the law is currently forced to turns a blind eye to extenuating circumstances.