This seems over the top.

S

Sir William

New member
My local police far, uh force is not too capable. They are trying though. They are not respected at all by the public or criminals. There have been a few pursuits of late. The police are throwing the book at those who hold them in contempt by running from them. This past Friday at 11:20 PM they were led on a vehicle and foot pursuit. Captain Bubba Hendley said that Jason H. Jones, 20 of 2845 State Route 440 was charged with 21 offenses. Jones was lodged in the Graves County Jail. The charges were; DUI-aggravated circumstance (?), 1st degree wanton endangerment-general, four more wanton endangerments, 1st degree wanton endangerment-police officer, fleeing or evading,police-vehicle, fleeing or evading police-on foot, tampering with physical evidence, speeding, reckless driving, disregarding a stop sign, license plate not illuminated, failure to use a turn signal, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia, failure to wear a seat belt, criminal trespass, leaving the scene of an accident and criminal mischief. Comments?
 
Sounds to me like a DUI (drunk, high, or both) fled, hit someone at some point, and took the fall for it. Thank God he's off the road before he killed me or my family.
 
SCcop, agreed. The PD charged a earlier offender with wanton endangerment 15 times on polce officers. Temps were in the 100s. Their logic was that the officers would not have been out in the heat if they were not involved in a pursuit and search. Interesting thought process. I am waiting to see if a court upholds these charges or if the PA drops them. I could see billing for search hours as a possibility. There are fire-rescue agencies that charge a idiot for their actions that require emergency intervention.
 
We don't have an equivalent law, but that is interesting. It does seem like a bit of stretch, of course certain dangers are inherent with the job. The only endangerment laws we have are for children. If he had someone under 17 with him while DUI (or just reckless driving) there would've been a charge of child endangerment. But LEO's are only victims if it's an outright act against them (threats, assault, etc.)
 
Hmmm... Interesting concept.

I wonder if they will charge the next guy who flees from police for 3 miles with "endangering an officer" by "forcing" said officer into a "high speed" pursuit (i.e. 15mph over the local speed limit).

I don't think that'll stick. My reasoning is thusly;
1. It's part of the officer's job to attempt to apprehend criminals.
2. It is also part of their job to pursue said criminals to attempt capture.
3. The officer has descretion to terminate pursuit when it becomes dangerous or risky to themselves or the public.
4. DA's will tell you that if you have the option of leaving when a crime happens and you stick around, they'll consider that "contributing negligence". If a police officer jumps into a foot pursuit in 100 degree heat then he should abort the pursuit before he risks a physical injury or exhaustion.

Charges like the license plate light, seat belt, not signalling, etc. are simply chickens**t infractions piled on to make the "charge count" higher. Any time I see the infamous "license plate light out" as an excuse for a stop or action, I know the cop had his bait & tackle in the car too.
 
BillCA, that is why I like you. You think things over as a reasonable man. I wonder if the officer could be charged with fishing w/o a license? LOL The number of local pursuits is up. One possibilty given is that the PD went from V-6 patrol cars to V-8 Interceptors and Chrysler 300 Hemis.
 
How about the fact that this jerk chose to flee, in a vehicle, while drunk? I don't blame them for "throwing the book at him". Yes the police can chose to stop chasing him. But it's his obligation to stop rather than speed off and endanger others.
To hold the police at fault for pursuing is like holding a homeowner at fault for shooting an intruder. In both cases the CRIMINAL initiated the act.
 
TLM,

I can't argue with your statements. All I'm pointing out is that it's absurd to charge someone with "endangering" a police officer on the basis that the officer could have been hurt in the pursuit. Lacking any overt act on the part of the suspect/defendant/criminal the simple act of fleeing the police does not give automatic rise to "endangerment".

Certainly a litany of charges can and should be brought for someone who's DUI and flees the police at high speed, causes near collisions, drives recklessly, etc.

Locally, one PD found itself on the short end of the stick when stopping a DUI that "fled" police -- at a whopping 11mph. The driver pleaded no contest to DUI (blood alcohol was .09. That's +.01 over the limit). Where the PD goofed was threefold - they initiated the stop on a busy boulevard with no-stopping signs and no room to stop; someone declared it a "pursuit" instead of a "failure to yield"; and as the motorist turned into a Target parking lot, his car was rammed and destroyed by police units - requiring him to spend 3 days in ICU and 21 days in the hospital. On top of that, they charged him with: DUI, "Evading police", Failure to yield to lights/siren, failure to signal (2 counts); impeding traffic (driving to SLOW!); reckless driving(? - at 11mph??), license not in possession (at hospital-it was knocked into the back seat of his car in the collision) and.... you guessed it - license plate light not working. Oh, and the PD/City tried to sue the guy's insurance company for repairs to their squad cars!

Unfortunately, I think the above case demonstrates that PD's are now looking to line up as many charges as they can as "revenue enhancement".

By the way, all charges except DUI were dismissed - not by plea agreement but by the judge after hearing the defendant's attorney make a good case for abuse of authority. He's also suing the PD for wanton recklessness, the replacement of his 4 year old car, hospital bills plus damages. He's likely to get it as he was on a cell phone telling a coworker he couldn't find "a safe place" to pull over and later that the cop was ramming him from behind.
 
Pursuits are dangerous. Making the cops chase you is dangerous. I'm OK with charging him if there's a law against what he did. Seems you have such a law.
 
Each time he bangs into something, makes a run at a police car etc it’s a separate offense and yes, although I know it galls BillCA you can be charged with endangerment of an officer. I know it’s not fashionable now but EVEN COPS have some rights. Why is it always Kalifonia that well known socialist workers paradise that holds cops in such contempt? We some times pile on charges to get one or two to stick and to force the damn lawyers to admit there was a good reason to arrest. They don't call it "weight of evidence" for no reason ;)
And by the way cops don't get anything from added charges the courts and city/state take all revenue from fines into the "general fund". Find another reason. God I will be glad when I retire and don't have to pretend I care about this nose drip called a society anymore. (Deep breath...) Now what was the question?
 
Good stop.

Sounds to me like a DUI (drunk, high, or both) fled, hit someone at some point, and took the fall for it. Thank God he's off the road before he killed me or my family.
Click to expand...

Here's a big fat +1 for the above statement.

It sounds to me not like they were trying to be a$$holes, but trying to make sure the he got stuck with something to get him off the street. Some of those charges are pretty serious and not easily made up.

BTW, if you're stopped without your license plate illuminated, you're breaking the law, knowingly or not. Here they usually hand out a 10 day repair notice for the first offense, after that it's game on. It's not "fishing", just enforcing the law.
 
Last edited:
None of this means much unless the courts hand down appropriate sentences.

The PD charged a earlier offender with wanton endangerment 15 times on polce officers. Temps were in the 100s. Their logic was that the officers would not have been out in the heat if they were not involved in a pursuit and search. Interesting thought process.
Click to expand...
I am "out in temps in the 100s" every day; can I apply these "offenses" against my corporate employers"? Should I get "hazardous duty pay" as well?
 
Tired of the BS

It's my feeling( if I were King) that anyone who decides to get his 15 minutes of fame by running from the cops should be delt with by an armed Huey. Aboout 2 rockets should suffice and then the Highway department would be called out to fix the resulting chuck hole.

Watching some nitwit waveing to the news choppers as he leads a high speed chase, or in one instance hanging almost completely out of his vehicle and touching the ground to show off to the media during the pursuit would cease to happen.

These idiots care less about the lives they put in danger or the property they damage. I find it very hard to care about the rights of these people much less worry about too many charges being brought against them. I worry more about the damage and heartache their actions can result in. :mad: :mad:
End of rant.
 
Sounds to me like most of the 21 charges are bargaining chips in the plea bargain process.

Everybody knows most of the charges won't stick. The defense lawyer hashes out a deal and tells his scumbag client he can get 18 charges dropped in exchange for no contest pleas on dui, fleeing and eluding, and marijuana. Scumbag thinks his lawyer is a miracle worker and takes whatever the prosecutor and judge will hand out. Hopefully, something severe.
 
Sulaco2 said:
Each time he bangs into something, makes a run at a police car etc it’s a separate offense and yes, although I know it galls BillCA you can be charged with endangerment of an officer. I know it’s not fashionable now but EVEN COPS have some rights. Why is it always Kalifonia that well known socialist workers paradise that holds cops in such contempt?
Click to expand...

You'll notice that in my post, I said...
Lacking any overt act on the part of the suspect/defendant/criminal the simple act of fleeing the police does not give automatic rise to "endangerment".
Click to expand...
Emphasis added

Certainly if the nitwit is swerving at the squad cars, ramming 'em, etc. each of those can be construed as a separate charge. What I was referring to is that the mere act of fleeing - in and of itself - does not give rise to a charge of "endangering" a police officer.

Pursuits are hairy things to engage in and there's always the danger of the slow car pulling out in front of a unit or the suspect. But to claim that a suspect's fleeing from an officer automatically creates undo "endangerment" I think is over the top (to use the title of this thread).

Sulaco2 - Please do not confuse me with those Kalifornicators who hold police in contempt. The only police I hold in contempt are those who don't respect the law themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top