NCJ Number
216222
Journal
Police Chief Volume: 73 Issue: 10 Dated: October 2006 Pages: 26,28-30,32-33,35
Date Published
October 2006
Length
7 pages
Annotation
This discussion of police-pursuit lawsuits addresses legal theories, hindsight bias in such lawsuits, the effect of pursuit policies on liability, risk management before the collision, and four steps in winning a police-pursuit lawsuit.
Abstract
All States have laws that control emergency vehicle driving. They typically describe the qualifications for an emergency vehicle, explain the rules of the road that may be violated, and warn emergency-vehicle drivers against a reckless disregard for the safety of the public. Police lawsuits that involve death or serious injury to an innocent party are particularly difficult to defend because of "hindsight bias." This refers to a tendency to examine an event from the perspective of the final outcome. In a police-pursuit lawsuit, juries tend to assume that if a high-speed police pursuit was the likely cause of an innocent person being killed or severely injured, then the pursuing officer and/or the department must be at fault. Theories of liability in such cases are that the department negligently failed to adopt a restrictive pursuit policy; the pursuit was negligently initiated; or the pursuit should have been terminated prior to the collision. Agencies can reduce the risk of pursuit-related lawsuits by limiting pursuits to persons that police believe have committed violent felonies. Most police lawyers believe that lawsuits resulting from such pursuits have a better chance of being successfully defended. The four steps in winning police-pursuit lawsuits are to fully explain the initiating event; use statistics to show the cost-effectiveness of capturing dangerous criminals compared to the low risk of innocent persons being killed or injured in the pursuit; establish the existence of departmental training and controls on pursuits; and use an outside pursuit expert. 10 notes