Deputy Timothy Scott Supreme court case -- are you infuriated?

Question

Before the Supreme court right now, is a case where 19 year old Victor Harris refused to pull over for police, accelerating to over 100 mph, AND hitting a police scar in theprocess, along with wreckless driving, yet when bumped and his car was ran off the road and hit a pole, resulting in Harris becoming a quadrupolegic (unable to walk now), LOWER courts have ruled in favor that it was the police who were in the wrong here--for not letting him go, and using unreasonable force to someone who didnt have a criminal past.

Does this piss you off?

What laws are police to enforce then, if they cant get these idiots who run away off the streets?

How was law enforcement to know he didnt have a hostage with him, for not wanting to stop? What about the safety of the victim

Yet the lower courts ruled that unreasonable force WAS used here?

So does that mean if you are a bank robber all you have to do is accelerate past 100 MPH to get away?

This pisses me off does it piss you off?

Jury and the next person speak like true lawyers who could mess up a wet dream.

I understand that there are laws. But the fact that no one but the perp was injured, the fact that he was running from the police, the fact that he failed ot pull over, the fact that he held no regard for the people or traffic around him.

If he did this once, then he might just do it again, especially if the cops let him go.
This sends the message to everyone being chased by the police -- GO FAST REAL FAST and they will have to let you go - or you can sue them.

The fact that he was being pulled over for a speedinging ticket is besides the point. The laws are the law, and the meesage we send will be heard by all.

Its bad enough lawyers can argue this -- imagine what happens when judges find this wrong on the deputy's part.

Everyone wants to argue, and it seem like no one uses common sense or thinks about the greater good anymore.

One speeder getting rammed off the road today could have saved a prgnant mother tomorrow.
Thats common sense - plain simple.
who can argue with that.

Otherwise we have police tip toeing around everything, hesitant about every arrest, which is pretty much as bad as it is now.

Heck, robbers can sue their victims now.

Personally, Id like to see any judge that ruled this wrong by the police to get expelled from his judgeship

Answer 1

When the public/courts/judges/prosecutors finally start holding the BAD GUY accountable for chases and stop putting it all on the police then things will get better. Until then people will continue to sue deep pockets to get paid.

Here is a question I will pose. Why is it perfectly acceptable for me to shoot a bad guy with a gun if I believe him to be an immediate threat to myself or someone else......but you put that bad guy behind the wheel of a 2,500 pound missle doing 100 mph on city streets...and all of the sudden the cops are using excessive force. Someone should smack these folks upside the heads to wake them up!

Answer 2

Karma is funny isn't it. I didn't know about this until now, but it makes me sick. This stupid boy runs from the law, and is now wanting to hold them responsible for his stupidity. This totally pisses me off. I can't believe this garbage made it all the way to the supreme court. What kind of precedence is this going to set if the Supreme Court rules in the boy's favor? Our country is so screwed up it isn't even funny.

In response to jurydoc I read up on it before commenting on it. It was the guys fault plain and simple. He was blue lighted, and gave chase, only guilty people run. The whole crap about him being to scared is just that crap. Did you happen to read where he rode through a strip mall, I can't imagine he was going the speed limit there either. When cops give chase they have no idea what they are dealing with, the car could be stolen, just not reported yet, there could be drugs, anything. And yeah it makes me angry that some idiot is wasting my tax dollars because he was to ignorant to stop.

Answer 3

Do any of you people actually consider the FACTS of a case before posting an opinion on it? The facts are not as one sided as you are lead to believe by this post. First of all, the cop joined in the pursuit without knowing why the guy was being pursued (for speeding). Second, the streets travelled were relatively free of any traffic or innocent bystanders. Finally, and probably most importantly, the cop requested to perform a maneuver that he had received no training on. When he realized he couldn't perform that maneuver, he decided to "bump" the fleeing guy's car with his front bumper.
There are legal precedents being used to decide this case and others like them. These decisions are not as open and shut as we might like them to be. Debate can and does exist which is what the courts are for. It will be very interesting to see what the SCOTUS decides.

Answer 4

How the hell are the police supposed to know if the guy has a criminal past?
I'm glad this guy's a quadrupolegic. At least now he can't get behind the wheel.
How can it be unreasonable force, if IT WORKED. They only have one mission in a chase. to END IT. They're not really worried about the safety of the driver, just the safety of everyone around him.