Those trying to evade cops cannot sue

Reuters:

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that a police officer cannot be held liable for ramming a fleeing car during a high-speed chase, forcing the vehicle off the road and resulting in severe injury or even death for the driver.

By an 8-1 vote, the high court ruled the officer's conduct reasonable because the car chase initiated by the suspect posed a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others.

Justice Antonin Scalia said for the majority that an officer's attempt to end a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatened the lives of innocent bystanders did not violate the Constitution, even if it placed the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death.

He said a police video of the incident "resembles a Hollywood-style car chase of the most frightening sort."

The Supreme Court took the unusual step of putting the video on its Web site, along with the ruling in the case involving a sheriff's deputy from Coweta County in Georgia. (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/video/scott_v_harris.rmvb).

Scalia said the video contradicted the suspect's version of events that pedestrians or other motorists faced little or no threat during the chase.

...

There is more. The drive endangered himself by trying to avoid arrest. He could have pulled over at any time with out risk of injury. This ruling should put into question the suit brought by illegal immigrants who were injury when a deputy shot the tires out on their car. It is not unreasonable to require people not to flee from a lawful inquiry by the police and when they do they are responsible for the consequences that flow from their attempts to flee. You have to really question the judgment of the lower courts who ruled in favor of the fleeing driver.