U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Moderators: mod 184, mod 329, Staff Moderator

U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Average Joe » 06/09/11 19:29:52

Today the U.S Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on police pursuits saying they are a violent felony.

Why do we not charge "Escape" when we charge someone for fleeing and eluding? Seems maybe this ruling says we might be able to.

From Justice Kennedy:

"Risk of violence is inherent to vehicle flight," Kennedy said. "It is well known that when offenders use motor vehicles as their means of escape they create serious potential risks of physical injury to others. Flight from a law enforcement officer invites, even demands, pursuit."


"Flight from a law enforcement officer invites, even demands, pursuit." Remember this one sentence the next time you are call off a pursuit.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/06/09/us.scotus.car.chases/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
if you can't be 100% truthful/honest, you are in the wrong profession
Average Joe
Verified LEO
 
Posts: 1567
Joined: 10/29/07 22:08:40
Location: Tampa

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/09/11 22:09:16

Average Joe wrote:Today the U.S Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on police pursuits saying they are a violent felony.

Why do we not charge "Escape" when we charge someone for fleeing and eluding? Seems maybe this ruling says we might be able to.

From Justice Kennedy:

"Risk of violence is inherent to vehicle flight," Kennedy said. "It is well known that when offenders use motor vehicles as their means of escape they create serious potential risks of physical injury to others. Flight from a law enforcement officer invites, even demands, pursuit."


"Flight from a law enforcement officer invites, even demands, pursuit." Remember this one sentence the next time you are call off a pursuit.

I'm all for using common sense and calling off certain pursuits. The big problem now at HCSO is that ANY supervisor that is working CAN call off a pursuit. So figure if there are lets say 4 supervisors working when a pursuit begins, it's almost a 100% guarantee that one of them will immediately freak out and call off the pursuit. Police work has become a thing of the past at HCSO now and todays younger deputies honestly have little experience in doing hands on proactive police work. The office has now promoted so many inexperienced supervisors, meaning ones that were NEVER proactive or aggressive on crime when they were deputies on the street, that it is having a plainly visible negative affect in patrol. The office is steadily losing most of the deputies and supervisors that grew up being aggressive and hands on when it came time to fight crime. Whats so sad about the whole thing is that society and even the supreme court justices, WANT law enforcement officers to BE AGGRESSIVE CURBING CRIME and to STOP THE GROWING CRIME IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS BY CHASING AFTER AND ARRESTING THOSE RESPONSIBLE. Unfortunately, HCSO has steadily become weaker and weaker when it comes time to allowing and encouraging it's deputies to go after and stop these criminals. This pattern has been allowed to develop and actually encouraged for so long now, that most deputies have either forgotten or have never been trained how to actively go after criminals without being spoon-fed and asking permission from a less than enthusiastic group of current patrol supervisors.
Guest
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/09/11 22:52:55

Fleeing in a vehicle IS deadly force, and should be dealt with as other deadly force situations.
Guest
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/10/11 06:07:51

I can understand calling the heavy traffic in the middle of the afternoon pursuits off but my gosh the late night when nobody is on the road is embarrassing at best. The new supervisors take it upon themselves to call off the late night ones and the Sheriff never intended for this to be the case. He was upset in the d4 pursuit a while back on saturday night in front of brandon town center where the risk to the public was great for a stolen vehicle pursuit. He never intended for them to call every single one off. The ones in sig 100 are the ones committing 41 and 21, its time to take back the streets.
Guest
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/10/11 13:35:04

I remember back in 2005, or so, at the Brandon Town Center, when unit 100 got on the radio and said "TAKE HIM OUT" in reference to a X31 truck that was trying to get away.
Guest
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/10/11 17:46:14

Think about this for a second, when was the last time any rank of leadership **THANKED** a deputy for pursuing and capturing a criminal? Now compare that to the amount of times leadership at HCSO has **SCOLDED** those involved with initiating a pursuit :? .

So as you can see, it is **SADLY** much easier and much less of a headache to just look the other way and let the fleeing criminals who are terrorizing Hillsborough County, just ride off untouched into the sunset. Should this way of doing things bother you? Yes it certainly should, but this is what current leadership seems to want based upon their actions & attitude toward pursuing criminals in Hillsborough County.

Pretty darn embarrassing when the citizens of Hillsborough County see a deputy turn off their equipment and pull a u-turn to go the opposite direction whenever a criminal refuses to play fair and flees from HCSO :oops: :oops: .
Guest
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Can't escape » 06/10/11 20:03:25

Average Joe wrote:Today the U.S Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on police pursuits saying they are a violent felony.

Why do we not charge "Escape" when we charge someone for fleeing and eluding? Seems maybe this ruling says we might be able to.

From Justice Kennedy:

"Risk of violence is inherent to vehicle flight," Kennedy said. "It is well known that when offenders use motor vehicles as their means of escape they create serious potential risks of physical injury to others. Flight from a law enforcement officer invites, even demands, pursuit."


"Flight from a law enforcement officer invites, even demands, pursuit." Remember this one sentence the next time you are call off a pursuit.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/06/09/us.scotus.car.chases/index.html?hpt=hp_t2



Why not charge escape? With all due respect to Justice Kennedy, you cannot "escape" until after you have been taken into custody.

That is the very fact that causes us to charge fleeing and eluding rather than escape in cases where a car chase is involved if the person has not been in custody.

:cop:
Can't escape
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest612 » 06/11/11 09:21:17

Remember, they view it from a legal stand. When you turn on your lights and sirens, you are now taking control of that person(s) and they are no longer free to leave. While you may not have physical control of them, they are still in your care and control (custody). It is by that reason, why we can't just run around stopping people without PC or Reasonable Suspicion. So when they run, they are attempting to escape you (fleeing and escaping are pretty much the same, in both cases, they are trying to get away from you). This would be one reason why the Judge(s) would view it as escape in his review of that case. Now is it practical to charge escape all the time, the reality of the world requires you to have the fleeing and eluding law.
Guest612
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/11/11 15:17:33

I think AJ was musing about charging people with escape. I do not believe any of the Justices suggested charging people with escape for fleeing in a vehicle.
Guest
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby No escape. » 06/11/11 15:46:49

Guest612 wrote:Remember, they view it from a legal stand. When you turn on your lights and sirens, you are now taking control of that person(s) and they are no longer free to leave. While you may not have physical control of them, they are still in your care and control (custody). It is by that reason, why we can't just run around stopping people without PC or Reasonable Suspicion. So when they run, they are attempting to escape you (fleeing and escaping are pretty much the same, in both cases, they are trying to get away from you). This would be one reason why the Judge(s) would view it as escape in his review of that case. Now is it practical to charge escape all the time, the reality of the world requires you to have the fleeing and eluding law.


What you describe is not escaping. It is fleeing and eluding. Read the statute: 316.1935 Fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer; aggravated fleeing or eluding.—
(1) It is unlawful for the operator of any vehicle, having knowledge that he or she has been ordered to stop such vehicle by a duly authorized law enforcement officer, willfully to refuse or fail to stop the vehicle in compliance with such order or, having stopped in knowing compliance with such order, willfully to flee in an attempt to elude the officer, and a person who violates this subsection commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

You are trying to take the same description and call it escaping. In fact in your post you say (incorrectly) that fleeing and escaping are pretty much the same thing.

Show me an "escape" traffic law that says the same thing.

:cop:
No escape.
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Average Joe » 06/11/11 20:29:30

Guest wrote:I think AJ was musing about charging people with escape. I do not believe any of the Justices suggested charging people with escape for fleeing in a vehicle.



Was asking a serious question.

The courts have ruled that if one flees from you on foot and he knew he was going to be arrested then this person is escaping and can be charged as such. Why not the same with cars? i am not saying to do this all of the time, but if you need to keep the person in jail in order to by you time to complete your investigation than why not. They would be held with a no bond.

Just saying sometimes you need to be creative, but then I am sure you would have a very hard time finding a supervisor that would stick their neck out and sign the CRA.
if you can't be 100% truthful/honest, you are in the wrong profession
Average Joe
Verified LEO
 
Posts: 1567
Joined: 10/29/07 22:08:40
Location: Tampa

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby No escape » 06/12/11 16:46:24

Average Joe wrote:
Guest wrote:I think AJ was musing about charging people with escape. I do not believe any of the Justices suggested charging people with escape for fleeing in a vehicle.



Was asking a serious question.

The courts have ruled that if one flees from you on foot and he knew he was going to be arrested then this person is escaping and can be charged as such. Why not the same with cars? i am not saying to do this all of the time, but if you need to keep the person in jail in order to by you time to complete your investigation than why not. They would be held with a no bond.

Just saying sometimes you need to be creative, but then I am sure you would have a very hard time finding a supervisor that would stick their neck out and sign the CRA.


No, you are confusing things. The fleeing on foot is just that... fleeing.

The justice clearly was talking about the hazards associated with automobiles in his ruling. "Risk of violence is inherent to vehicle flight," Kennedy said. "It is well known that when offenders use motor vehicles as their means of escape they create serious potential risks of physical injury to others." That is where the violent felony comes in.

You can't be creative with your charges where there is no Florida Statute to support you. Don't get hung up on the term escape.

:roll:
No escape
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/14/11 02:33:17

When did you ever charge someone who flees on foot from you with FLEEING??????? Didn't think so. Brush up on your statutes ROOK.
No escape wrote:
Average Joe wrote:
Guest wrote:I think AJ was musing about charging people with escape. I do not believe any of the Justices suggested charging people with escape for fleeing in a vehicle.



Was asking a serious question.

The courts have ruled that if one flees from you on foot and he knew he was going to be arrested then this person is escaping and can be charged as such. Why not the same with cars? i am not saying to do this all of the time, but if you need to keep the person in jail in order to by you time to complete your investigation than why not. They would be held with a no bond.

Just saying sometimes you need to be creative, but then I am sure you would have a very hard time finding a supervisor that would stick their neck out and sign the CRA.


No, you are confusing things. The fleeing on foot is just that... fleeing.

The justice clearly was talking about the hazards associated with automobiles in his ruling. "Risk of violence is inherent to vehicle flight," Kennedy said. "It is well known that when offenders use motor vehicles as their means of escape they create serious potential risks of physical injury to others." That is where the violent felony comes in.

You can't be creative with your charges where there is no Florida Statute to support you. Don't get hung up on the term escape.

:roll:
Guest
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Not escape » 06/14/11 10:02:38

Guest wrote:When did you ever charge someone who flees on foot from you with FLEEING??????? Didn't think so. Brush up on your statutes ROOK.
No escape wrote:
Average Joe wrote:
Guest wrote:I think AJ was musing about charging people with escape. I do not believe any of the Justices suggested charging people with escape for fleeing in a vehicle.



Was asking a serious question.

The courts have ruled that if one flees from you on foot and he knew he was going to be arrested then this person is escaping and can be charged as such. Why not the same with cars? i am not saying to do this all of the time, but if you need to keep the person in jail in order to by you time to complete your investigation than why not. They would be held with a no bond.

Just saying sometimes you need to be creative, but then I am sure you would have a very hard time finding a supervisor that would stick their neck out and sign the CRA.


No, you are confusing things. The fleeing on foot is just that... fleeing.

The justice clearly was talking about the hazards associated with automobiles in his ruling. "Risk of violence is inherent to vehicle flight," Kennedy said. "It is well known that when offenders use motor vehicles as their means of escape they create serious potential risks of physical injury to others." That is where the violent felony comes in.

You can't be creative with your charges where there is no Florida Statute to support you. Don't get hung up on the term escape.

:roll:



Since there are multiple quotes in the message, it is unclear who you are addressing your remarks to.

What do YOU charge someone who flees on foot that you have never had in lawful custody.....escape? Quote the statute.

:?:
Not escape
 

Re: U.S. Justices rule fleeing police is a violent felony

Postby Guest » 06/30/11 12:31:21

Flee to elude if they got out of a car and was the driver, having been lawfully stopped by an identified law enforcement officer.
Guest
 

Next

Return to Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

It's Time for Better FREE Email. The Bright Network Premium Email Service.

Crimson Trace Adomo-Cunhilll & Damas