Posted on 05/27/2014 9:31:07 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
The Arkansas police officers who fired 15 rounds into a fleeing vehicle, killing both the driver and passenger, were justified in doing so, the Supreme Court ruled Monday.
In 2004, police officers in West Memphis ended a high-speed car chase by firing shots into the fleeing vehicle. The drivers of the car weren’t armed and were killed as a result of the firing, leading many to argue the use of force by the police squad was excessive. Not so, declared Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the decision for the court.
“Under the circumstances present in this case,” Mr. Alito said, “we hold that the Fourth Amendment did not prohibit petitioners from using the deadly force that they employed to terminate the dangerous car chase.” “If police officers are justified in firing at a suspect in order to end a severe threat to public safety,” the high court held, “the officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Just curiuos...who were the people in the car? No mention in the article. Maybe there was a reason why they were fleeing the police.
driving a car and following high way rules is not turning the car into a deadly weapon.
Driving high speed through traffic when the cops are chasing you makes it deadly.
Silly illogical response.
Sure there are cop haters on FR. More seem to show up every week.
Maybe its because people don’t like what the cops are doing. Shocking idea, I know, but its just possible that more and more people think the cops are out of control.
“deadly force that they employed to terminate the dangerous car chase”
If the cops had quit chasing the car, wouldn’t that ended the chase?
We’re talking possession, not intent. If mere possession is sufficient cause then the cops can shoot anyone at any time.
But then they already do, so I guess it doesn’t matter.
won’t be long and all new cars will be required to have a remote kill law enforcement can use to end the chase before it starts.
The two drivers in this case weren’t even armed.
Our unelected rulers turn against us.
If cops are required to quit chasing cars, more criminals will run from the police, and thumb their noses as they do.
The law (used) to say the police aren’t the judge, jury, and executioner. And never before has the law prescribed the death penalty for avoiding arrest.
Years ago my 20 year old stepson was a passenger of a car driven by a friend of his. His friend decided to run when he saw cop lights because he had warrants for unpaid traffic tickets. They ran into a tree during the chase and my stepson was killed.
There are a lot of cases where the cops use excessive force, including deadly force. This just doesn’t happen to be one of them.
I'm sorry... I can't tell from the article.
Exactly what was the Fourth Amendment issue in this case?
How does shooting at a fleeing car involve unreasonable search and seizure, or warrants naming the thing and place to be searched?
Were they arguing that the person had a right to be secure in their car, and that the pursuing police didn't have a right to stop them?
-PJ
“If cops are required to quit chasing cars, more criminals will run from the police, and thumb their noses as they do.”
Numerous cities have established no chase or limited chase options and the world didn’t end.
Perhaps its the thumbing their nose part that you take issue with.
It wasn’t “mere” possession.
If you don’t consider context or situation important then we’re done. I have nothing more to say.
Bad ruling. If they could shoot to kill they could have shot to disable the vehicle. The issue is the discretion used - the lack of.
Donald Rickard led police officers on a high-speed car chase that came to a temporary halt when Rickard spun out into a parking lot. Rickard resumed maneuvering his car, and as he continued to use the accelerator even though his bumper was flush against a patrol car, an officer fired three shots into Rickard’s car. Rickard managed to drive away, almost hitting an officer in the process. Officers fired 12 more shots as Rickard sped away, striking him and his passenger, both of whom died from some combination of gunshot wounds and injuries suffered when the car eventually crashed.
Unless it’s a fleeing armed and dangerous murderer they could send the license plate number out and catch them.
Interesting that the article doesn’t mention who was prosecuting the officers.
Here is video of incident.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTfGkVQz208
The incident in question began in July 2004, when police in West Memphis, Arkansas, questioned Donald Rickard at a gas station about a broken light on his white Honda.
Rickard refused to step out the car and then took off. With his girlfriend, Kelly Allen, in the passenger seat, Rickard crossed over the Mississippi River into Tennessee along Interstate 40.
After Rickard rammed a police car head-on and sideswiped another, police fired 15 shots into the vehicle, mounted cameras from police vehicles show. The car went airborne and slammed into a house in Memphis. Rickard and Allen, both 44, were killed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.