I don't know exactly what the issue before the Supreme Court was, but it seems to me that it's not the court's job to determine whether a police chase was dangerous or not. That's a jury's job.
Not that I think the case seems to have a lot of merit to it. Police chase policies can be argued. However, if you're the guy who was speeding and refused to pull over you really don't have a heck of a case if you sue the deputy who took actions to stop you; your injuries are pretty much your own fault. If a 3d party had been hurt in the crash that person would have a heck of a case, but that's not what went on here.
Of course, this is my relatively uninformed opinion. A jury might look at the tape and decide that the deputy's actions were grossly disproportionate for the speeding which was the original basis for the attempted stop. Of course, this article makes it look like the court is not going to allow the jury to do its job (decide the facts) because the court is going to preempt by deciding this fact while claiming to decide a legal issue.
Spread The Love, Share Our Article
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular entries
-
Incident: Sick Kids physician loses portable hard-drive with unencrypted personal health informationA physician from Sick Kids hospital who decided to travel with a portable hard-drive containing unencrypted health information on 3,300 pat...
-
The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta released a very interesting order today, considering whether the right to freedom of exp...
-
INSOL Europe recently published a report titled Harmonisation of Insolvency Law at EU Law Level : see here ( pdf ). The report outlines di...
-
Apparently the American government is about to implement its latest version of the no-fly list, without data mining using commercial sources...
-
If all those who say they should be in prison are willing to pay for that through their chequebooks rather than mine and many other taxpayer...
-
Section 309 of the California Corporations Code provides that a director must act in good faith, in the manner in which he/she believes to...
-
A few matters on the subject of tenancy deposit protection which I have been meaning to comment on for a while. The August issue of Legal Ac... -
On June 23, Australia's Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services published a report titled Better sharehold...
-
Several months ago the Court of Appeal gave judgment in Moore Stephens (a firm) v Stone & Rolls Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 644 and it would ap...
-
"Police tried to calm the teen, but Holyfield became combative, according to the statement. Officers fired the stun gun at him after he...
Comments
Post a comment on: Why is the Supreme Court Looking at the Tape?