Ever get that run down feeling? You know, the one where a police car going very fast without its lights or sirens on runs you down. It’s happening with some frequency in Wichita, Kansas lately, and apparently the locals aren’t entirely thrilled about it.
Of course, the Wichita Police Department isn’t thrilled with the fact that its officers are mowing down citizens right and left, even if its only three people in five years. It’s the sort of thing that creates a division in the community, where people get miffed at losing loved ones to cops speeding around for no particular reason and take out grandpa or some sweet young mother of three. Bad press too.Since 2007, three people in Wichita have been killed in accidents with officers who were allegedly speeding and did not have their lights and sirens on. The city has paid out $500,000 to settle two lawsuits. A third lawsuit, filed in December, is pending.
Two attorneys representing families of the people killed and one attorney defending one of the officers involved say the department needs to recognize that officers speed and change its policy to allow officers to use lights and sirens more often to warn other motorists.“Why can’t we just acknowledge that there’s a tendency to speed … sometimes a tendency to speed greatly, because they’re out there doing a service?” asked Wichita lawyer Craig Shultz, who represented the family of a person killed in 2007.
On the flip side, cops get to speed at will. Like free donuts, it’s a perk of the job, and has been since they were handed the keys to the cruiser and told “have fun out there.”
Doesn’t it seem like the next line should be “but boys will be boys?”In reality, they speed.
“We know that officers speed, we don’t like it, and we will aggressively pursue officers that are speeding,” said Lt. Doug Nolte, a department spokesman.
There is no excuse for this to happen. Contrary to most people’s assumption, the police aren’t authorized to break the law any more than anyone else, and that includes speeding (or running red lights) for fun. If they are on an emergency call, they are authorized to use their lights and siren and exceed the speed limit. If they aren’t, then they are supposed to drive just like anyone else. Maybe even better than anyone else, given how badly most people drive.
A rather odd explanation of the use of emergency equipment. While it may be true that lights and sirens are distracting, isn’t that what they’re supposed to be? The purpose is to alert drivers to an official vehicle engaged in an emergency operation. They don’t put lights and sirens on police cruisers so they can speed to the donut shop as soon as fresh crullers hit the shelves.The department limits the use of lights and sirens because it can distract motorists and officers and cause accidents, Nolte said. Lights and sirens aren’t always effective because sometimes motorists don’t see, hear or heed the equipment, he said.
And sure, some drivers ignore lights and sirens. And some people walk into walls. Is this meant as a justification for speeding without lights and sirens? Is this meant to explain why cops speed for fun?
But all is not lost, as the Wichita Police Department, after careful consideration, has devised a plan to address the situation.
The department wants the public to report officers who are speeding without lights and sirens or driving unsafely, he said.
There are so many ways in which the Department could address the problem, whether from a policy against their officers speeding with a sufficient sanction in place to make it in the cop’s interest to slow down, to technological solutions such as GPS or “snapshot” type registers of speed and equipment usage. But instead of doing what they can on their end, they’ve chosen the pacify the public solution of telling people they should report cops to cops for speeding.
At least they will have a good laugh about it back at the stationhouse, but the problem remains that cops speed:
One of the root problems is that “police routinely speed,” said Geoffrey Alpert, a University of South Carolina professor of criminology who has studied traffic issues for 20 years. In a world where police don’t get ticketed by fellow officers when they break traffic laws while off-duty, it gives officers a “sense of impunity,” Alpert said.
Apparently, they have a GPS system in place to monitor police driving already:
A lot of departments have GPS capability to check speeds of their patrol cars. “It’s a problem that needs to be monitored,” he said.
The Wichita Police Department uses a countywide system that allows supervisors to check patrol car speeds and officers’ driving, and some officers have been disciplined as a result, Nolte said.
What apparently isn’t happening, despite the systems and alleged discipline is that the root problem of police culture, that they can break the law with impunity, has not changed. So what if they run down a few people from time to time. Them’s the breaks.
There are certain risks inherent in police work, which many refuse to accept and most don’t like one bit. But as police perform their function, they are entitled to be defensive rather than allow themselves to be put at risk of harm. As much as people fear the police entering a location where a potentially dangerous suspect may be with their guns drawn, and as experience dictates they should, there is a sound reason for permitting them to do so, and we can only hope they have the training and experience not to pull the trigger first and determine who they’re shooting at second.
But there is no excuse for running people down. Much as cops consider the right to speed a perk of the job, killing people for the sake of your convenience is just plain stupid and sick. That Wichita shifts the duty to the public, as if there is any chance of that changing things, is foolish and reflects a lack of concern and respect for their citizens.
If they want to stop improper speeding by cops, just do it. This is public pacification, which will last only until they run down the next person.
H/T FritzMuffKnuckle
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
A lot of departments have GPS capability to check speeds of their patrol cars. “It’s a problem that needs to be monitored,” he said.
The Wichita Police Department uses a countywide system that allows supervisors to check patrol car speeds and officers’ driving, and some officers have been disciplined as a result, Nolte said.
No one expects the police will actually discipline themselves without oversight by another. History tells us so. The criminal courts don’t have a great track record in this department.
Perhaps, with the accountability that comes with dashboard cams and GPS data that can monitor speed, it will be civil lawsuits using such data that will bring about change.
Many DAs work closely with the cops and are less likely, perhaps, to aggressively pursue the matter than the PI guys who don’t have that relationship and don’t care about cracking a few eggs.
Liability verdicts mean tax dollars spent. Will the voters / tax payers blame the PI lawyers or the rogue cops and their supervisors that created the problem?
Or will DAs and police supervisors finally start doing their jobs in this area?
While I’m all in favor of oversight by way of liability, the problem is twofold: Payments don’t come from the cops’ pocket, but from the taxpayer’s, and by the time a judgment or settlement is reached, it’s years after the occurrence and can always be blamed on bad management “way back when.”
Still, it remains one of the few methods of compelling responsibility since, as you rightly note, we certainly can’t expect the police to police themselves.
Couldn’t police regulations be rewritten (yes, I know, the police union would need to sign off) to simply state that speeding while not on duty is not part of official business?
If it’s not official business, then the business (here, the PD, city, or county) is not on the hook for any civil damages.
Two aspects: First, that cops are always “on duty” in the sense that they are responsible (and also covered) for off-duty line of work conduct. That’s why they get to carry guns wherever they go. Second, the problem isn’t legal entitlement to speed, but professional cop courtesy. Remember this?
Yeah… there’s all that.
The only other thing I can think of (and I can think of lots of reasons why it wouldn’t work) would be a citizen panel that assessed whether or not the speeding was truly in the line of duty, even if off-duty.
It sounds good in theory, but you ever notice that the citizens who get appointed to official panels tend to associate far more closely with the government than their fellow citizens? No doubt, that’s why they’re in the position to be appointed to a panel in the first place. They’re hanging out with the wrong crowd.
“The Wichita Police Department uses a countywide system that allows supervisors to check patrol car speeds and officers’ driving, and some officers have been disciplined as a result, Nolte said.”
So, the WPD can already monitor the speeds and locations of its officers at all times (at least when they’re in their cruisers). And they are already doing so, so why would they need civilians to report infractions? Surely a simple cross-reference with dispatching (is officer X in car Y on a run?) would permit officials to immediately contact the officer if they were speeding while not on official business?
And wouldn’t that imply that the officials were aware of the speeding officers at the time of the accidents?
I would think “checking” implies occasional rather than constant monitoring. I can’t imagine there is a supervisor checking the speed of every officer 24/7.
Perhaps not, but nothing prevents the WPD from hiring a few civilian clerks to do exactly that. It fits the micro-managing style, and further justifies the expense of the fancy monitoring programs they’ve installed. For that matter, I should think a simple program could flash an alert when excessive speed without benefit of official business is detected. Either would be better than the occasional random citizen being run over, from everyone’s point of view.
Now you’re getting a bit crazy. If they wanted to stop it, they would stop it. They don’t want to. They want to appease the public outrage. Get real. The question was never how to stop cops from speeding, but how to stop the public from being angry with cops.
Montgomery County MD had an ongoing issue with cops routinely running red lights & getting their picture taken. The union’s response to the county was “The law says the car owner is liable, not the driver…”
Have not heard the outcome of that.
There’s concern for you.
You mean the Montgomery County police aren’t smart enough to figure out the “turn your lights on right before running through the red light and turn them off after crossing to look like you are engaged in official police business and not just inpatient” trick yet? 😛
Don’t be ridiculous. They could sprain their finger and be out on disability for years that way. Think of the taxpayers!
Silly me, i would think that the best way to stop the public from being angry at the cops running people over while engaged in speedy frolics and detours for pleasure would be to stop the police from being able to break traffic laws with inpunity.
Thinking like that explains why i am not a politician 😉