Posted on 04/30/2007 10:35:55 AM PDT by Eyes Unclouded
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday gave police officers significant protection from lawsuits by suspects who lead them on car chases.
The justices ruled 8-1 against Georgia teenager Victor Harris, who was left a quadriplegic after a police vehicle rammed his car off the road in 2001.
A police officer used "reasonable force" when ramming the teen's speeding car, the high court ruled. A videotape of the pursuit played a key role in the decision.
"The car chase that [Harris] initiated in this case posed substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others," Justice Scalia wrote for the majority. "[Deputy Timothy] Scott's attempt to terminate the chase by forcing [Harris] off the road was reasonable."
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that Harris' lawsuit against the deputy could go forward. The justices overturned the lower court ruling, meaning the suit can be dismissed.
Eight of the nine justices said they had closely viewed the videotape of the six-minute nighttime chase. It was taken from the dashboard of Scott's car and from the vehicle of another deputy from a neighboring county.
Similar pursuits have been aired, sometimes live, on many cable and broadcast television stations, and entire programs have been built around such incidents, such as "World's Wildest Police Chases." Tape fascinates justices
The tape seemed to fascinate some of the justices. Scalia referred to the videotape repeatedly in his opinion, calling it a "wrinkle" that clearly swayed the bench.
Scalia wrote, "The videotape tells a different story."
He continued, "Far from being the cautious and controlled driver the lower court depicts, what we see on the video more closely resembles a Hollywood-style car chase of the most frightening sort, placing police officers and innocent bystanders alike at greater risk of serious injury."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I’ll take that over giving thugs a license to steal and flee.
Excuse me?
Translation here please.
All your car chase are belong to us?
Ginsberg i think
You have stuned her beeber. This could be HUGH and vey series!
No fool!
Not a bad effort. Maybe you could follow her around and translate all her posts for the rest of us?
Resistance is futile.
If someone makes a concious decision to run when told to stop I'm not too sure I wouldn't like to see the police SHOOT them then and there.
That would not happen too many times before a police officer's blue light, or verbal order to stop would get a LOT more respect and there would be many fewer chases.
LOL!
Easy to say when it’s not you who have been hit by a police car or have had a police car drive through the front of your store.
This is just a guess, but I think that if you were struck by a police car who went out of a control in a high-speed chase and wound up in a wheelchair—or worse—I doubt your first reaction would be, “well, thank goodness we didn’t let that guy run from a $75 speeding ticket.”
Good a guess as any... ? :o)
Stupid is as stupid does....
Now..., I don’t know if I can translate that... LOL
That reminds me of a movie I saw (maybe in Airplane or Airport?), where there was a big black guy on an airplane doing black/ghetto-talk, and they “translated” on the screen while he was doing it... :-)
You were doing FReep-talk...
LOL, that would be too much work... :-)
Surprisingly, it WASN’T Ginsburg. I read later in the thread that it was John Paul Stevens, another reliable lib.
You said — “Good a guess as any... ? :o)”
Yeah, thanks, but I even goofed it up a bit. I should have taken out one word. Just goes to show you, that we’re all typing too fast here...
Should have been —
How about suing the suspect of the car chase? That works for me. I wonder..., was the “victim” on his CELL PHONE? HELLO??!!
[an extra “was” in there...] :-) Now, why did I do all that? LOL
It is called Rule 11 sanctions under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
This sanction provides the client AND THE ATTORNEY are jointly and severally liable for the sanctions imposed. The sanctions can the the attorney fees of the moving party, costs, and any other penalties the court deem just and proper.
Thus the lawyer can be assessed 100% of the sanction and then be left to sort out the clients share seperatly with the client.
Not to many judges impose rule 11 sanctions because even a frivilous case makes work for the defending lawyers.
It was a joke. See # 43.
No. I’d be mad as hell at the runner not the cop.
I don’t believe in giving a thug a free ticket to escape. If anything, I’d let the cops beat the b@st@rd into a paste once they caught him. Its not like there is a question about his guilt...
Personally, I think your way would lead to MORE high speed nutballs. After all, no one is gonna chase ‘em right? They can do as the please. “Chase free zones” would as effective as “gun free zones” were at VT.
Randy: Can I get you something?
Second Jive Dude: 'S'mofo butter layin' me to da' BONE! Jackin' me up... tight me!
Randy: I'm sorry, I don't understand.
First Jive Dude: Cutty say 'e can't HANG!
Jive Lady: Oh stewardess! I speak jive.
Randy: Oh, good.
Jive Lady: He said that he's in great pain and he wants to know if you can help him.
Randy: All right. Would you tell him to just relax and I'll be back as soon as I can with some medicine?
Jive Lady: Jus' hang loose, blood. She gonna catch ya up on da' rebound on da' med side.
Second Jive Dude: What it is, big mama? My mama no raise no dummies. I dug her rap!
Jive Lady: Cut me some slack, Jack! Chump don' want no help, chump don't GET da' help!
First Jive Dude: Say 'e can't hang, say seven up!
Jive Lady: Jive ass dude don't got no brains anyhow! Hmmph!
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.