The National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration says more than 350 people
die each year in police chases. These
high-speed chases become especially
dangerous when law enforcement officials
hit a suspect's car with their patrol
vehicle after the driver fails to pull
over. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected
to hear arguments on whether this method
violates constitutional protections.
High-speed police chases are dramatic,
dangerous and often deadly.
Nineteen-year-old Victor Harris knows
the dangers all too well after a late
night on a damp Georgia highway. With
speeds topping 145 kilometers per hour,
Harris failed to pull over for officers.
What happened next changed his life
forever.
"Fifty six, sixty six. Permission to PIT
him?" asks a police officer while
pursuing the car. "Go ahead and take him
out. Take him out!" is the reply from
his supervisor over the police radio.
Deputy Sheriff Timothy Scott's decision
to "take him out" is called a "Precision
Intervention Technique." An officer
bumps a fleeing car at an angle to spin
it out of control, forcing it to stop.
The move is risky, and Harris' lawyer,
Craig Jones, says his client paid too
great a price when he lost control of
his Cadillac and careened down an
embankment. "My client is now paralyzed
from the head down."
The Supreme Court is expected to hear
arguments in Harris' case on whether
individuals are constitutionally
protected against this technique. The
Fourth Amendment forbids unreasonable
searches and seizures. So if the Court
decides Scott acted unreasonably, he
will lose his immunity and could be
sued.
Cities across the country are also
considering whether to ban or limit
these high-speed chases.
Jones says his client was just a scared
traffic violator, driving with a
suspended license. "The mere fact that
someone is driving unsafely or driving
in violation of traffic laws, is that
enough reason to be able to use deadly
force to stop them?"
Deputy Scott's lawyer, Philip Savrin,
says his client's actions were
justified. "It's about decisions police
officers have to make on the spur of the
moment when confronted with rapidly
unfolding and dangerous situations. It
really isn't about Deputy Scott."
It is about how far police can go to
stop a suspect from getting away. |
|
美国国家公路交通安全管理局说，美国每年有350多人在警察的追捕行动中丧生。嫌疑人没停车而警察以他们的巡逻车截停嫌疑人汽车的高速追捕尤其危险，预计美国最高法院将听取这种方法是否违宪的辩论。
警察高速驾车追捕嫌疑人是危险的，常常也是致命的。
现年19岁的威克特.哈利斯一天深夜在乔治亚州路面潮湿的高速公路上的经历，让他深深体验到这种危险性。他驾车的时速高达145公里，他没按警察的指示把车停下，之后发生的事永远改变了他的生活。
“5666，可以对他实行精确拦截吗？”追踪哈利斯的一个警官问道。“把他截住，把他截住！”他的上司通过警方电台回答道。
副警长提摩西.斯科特决定的“把他截住”是所谓“精确截车技术(PIT)”的指令。警官驾车以一个特别的角度轻轻碰撞逃跑的车辆使其打转并失去控制，迫使它停下来。
这种行动很危险。哈利斯的律师说，哈利斯的凯迪拉克车失去控制，翻倒在路基下，使他付出了沉重的代价。“我的客户现在全身瘫痪。”
预计最高法院将听取哈利斯案子双方关于宪法是否保护私人不受这种精确截车技术侵犯的辩论。美国宪法第四修正案禁止不合理的搜查和抓捕。因此，如果最高法院判定斯科特警官的行动不合理，他将失去他的豁免权并可能受到起诉。
美国各城市也正在考虑是否要禁止或限制高速追捕。
哈利斯的律师说，他的客户只不过因吊销了驾驶执照而惊慌失措，违规驾驶。他说：“事实是，有人开车不顾安全或者违反了交通法规，难道这就成为使用致命手段拦截他们的理由吗？”
斯科特副警长的律师表示，斯科特的行为正当。他说：“问题在于，警官在面对突然出现的危险状况时必须立刻作出决断。这不是斯科特警官个人的问题。”
真正的问题在于，警察在阻止嫌疑人逃跑时到底可以采取什么样的行动。 |
