Glock Talk banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Rational
Joined
·
17,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just wanted your thoughts on this PIT.

Personally speaking, I think they had an opportunity to stop it before the suspect went against traffic. Pitting a guy into oncoming traffic doesn't seem right to me.

But hey: I'm not a cop, so I'll just leave it here for discussion and keep an open mind.


I'm afraid I don't know any backstory to this. It happened in April of this year, in Delaware County, Ohio.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
806 Posts
Just wanted your thoughts on this PIT.

Personally speaking, I think they had an opportunity to stop it before the suspect went against traffic. Pitting a guy into oncoming traffic doesn't seem right to me.

But hey: I'm not a cop, so I'll just leave it here for discussion and keep an open mind.


I'm afraid I don't know any backstory to this. It happened in April of this year, in Delaware County, Ohio.
In my opinion, LE should have backed off but still pursued the suspect. Unless there was a hostage in the car with the suspect.
Hot pursuits, lights and sirens does not give LE right of way.
Should they injure or kill an innocent victim, they will be held accountable.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

·
Semper Paratus
Joined
·
30,891 Posts
In my opinion, LE should have backed off but still pursued the suspect. Unless there was a hostage in the car with the suspect.
Hot pursuits, lights and sirens does not give LE right of way.
Should they injure or kill an innocent victim, they will be held accountable.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
when you pursue you need to be close enough to give others a warning ,so I don't understand your backed off but still pursue.
The pit should've happened earlier I don't know why they waited plenty of opportunities when he was By himself on that long stretch of highway.
And yes he should not of pitted him into oncoming traffic not something we train to do,however ,tunnel vision is known to start in during stressful situations


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,851 Posts
Here where I live and worked, if the USMS went after a fugitive in a vehicle, they had aviation assets overhead in case the BG would go into flee mode. Perhaps the METAR didn't allow it for that day or no aircraft were available.

The ground units stated that they didn't have enough units and based on what I saw, I agree. Chasing a mobile fugitive usually requires marked and unmarked units, with enough of them to get the job done, and that's a problem in most areas.

Stop sticks on an interstate or a major highway are usually ineffective. Either there is no way to shut down the entire highway because of the desire to allow uninvolved traffic to flow, too many lanes of traffic, or inability to slow and channel traffic through a choke point where spikes are at. I don't see any easy places where that could have been done.

As soon as the fugitive went the wrong way, I cringed. As soon as the pursing unit followed him, I went into 'reluctant spectator at the anarchist NASCAR race' mode waiting for the inevitable crashes and mangled bodies. Some agencies allow this tactic and some do not - mine did not and I agree with the rationale behind it. Many agencies will set up a traffic break several miles downrange to cut off traffic flow as the kamikaze driver heads toward them. Once traffic is cleared, intercepting police units can PIT or otherwise take out the vehicle, but again, it requires more units and they have to be in the right place at the right time and with a senior/supervisor unit that knows well how to set up the break.

Once a pursuit at those speeds heads into oncoming traffic, knowing the fugitive status and the reckless driving history during the pursuit, the agency either needs to engage the threat or retreat from the engagement. Neither is a particularly attractive choice at that time, since the possible outcomes are fraught with liabilities.

Were I the pursuing unit going against traffic, I would have cleared on the radio and expressly asked if a traffic break was established and if one could safely be done. If the answer was no, I would announce that I was going to kinetically engage the vehicle when traffic allowed and to start FD/EMS and other units to the scene. When the moment arrived, I would announce and take out the other vehicle, hoping that no one other than the suspect/I were injured or killed doing it.

There are a myriad of constantly changing variables and it only takes one out of place or unplanned for to create a horrific incident. I didn't see any easy outs in that chase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,367 Posts
1) the PIT done at over 35 mph is generally considered deadly force. Until he went the wrong way, using deadly force to stop him might have also been excessive force.

2) Backed off but still pursued? What?? Once the suspect INTENTIONALLY goes the wrong way on the interstate, how exactly would your plan work?

At least if the officers are right behind him, MAYBE their emergency lights will warn oncoming traffic of the danger.

"Backing off", but still pursuing means no warning from the emergency lights of the wrong way vehicle AND people would claim that the police continued to PUSH the suspect by not totally breaking off.

Your option seems worse than either continuing the chase, or entirely breaking off the chase.

When the second officer switches to the wrong way, the suspect looks like he was about to switch lanes a second time, into the correct lanes. Maybe they should have let him do that.

3) Had the supervisor IMMEDIATELY authorized the PIT when the suspect went the wrong way, they might have been able to PIT at a much lower speed.

4) This may be just me, but when I watched that pursuit and the suspect started slowing when approaching a median turn around, I knew he was about to do something REALLY, REALLY DUMB. In a perfect world, the officer chasing him should have forced him into the median arrestor wires, or rammed him to prevent him from getting into the opposing lanes.

5) I don't know how you can PIT a car to the right, with it's right side next to the shoulder of the road. No way it makes any sense to say the police car should get into the grassy median, in order to PIT. OTOH, maybe getting alongside, on the driver's side, and forcing the suspect car into the median would be possible.

6) He was reportedly suicidal, so letting him continue in the wrong lanes may mean he might intentionally veer into oncoming traffic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
Driving up next to them and shooting them in the side of the head works, but you don't know which direction they will go. Ok if there is no other traffic or buildings. 500 gr. FMJ out of a 45-70 through the engine works also. Once he crossed over to the wrong side of the road, things are liable to end badly no matter what you do. When a guy is running this hard, better to end it as soon as possible one way or another.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,618 Posts
That was ugly....

They should have tried to PIT him earlier, there were a couple of times he slowed enough for it to have worked; Once he was going the wrong way it upped the ante a bit; I know that our policy specifically allows not for simply a PIT, but also for an out and out ramming in that situation, as their wrong way travel presents a grave danger to the public......I don't know about sending him into the oncoming traffic lanes (I would have been looking to get on his right side when some pavement opened up and put him into the median) but as someone else said, in the moment guys will fixate on something, and the left side of the suspect vehicle was what was presenting itself...

Wish we had more info on this one, it looked to have been started by the Marshal's Service, so the guy was probabla fairly serious fugitive, which also factors into it, since if he were a murderer of a terror suspect there is a bit more urgency to apprehending him....
 

·
Texas Born & Bred
Joined
·
3,715 Posts
I agree with OLY with the exception that I may have attempted the right side PIT when at the lower speed. The suspect vehicle stood a chance of a rollover with the elevation changes in the roadway median, but that consideration would have been preferable TO ME than the continued pursuit into oncoming. But to be clear, I have the advantage of sitting back and watching the video and not being in the pursuit. I do not find fault with what was done from the safety of “Monday morning quarterbacking”..
 

·
Rational
Joined
·
17,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
To me, it seems like at 4:40, after the suspect missed the spikes and went around traffic, then the lead chase car should have been immediately looking for an opportunity to PIT.

I can only speculate that, as is the nature of all pursuits, they didn't anticipate the suspect crossing into oncoming traffic. Perhaps they thought they could wait him out and try another opportunity to spike him further up the highway?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,851 Posts
The PIT, at speed, is a problematic maneuver. Many agencies do not allow it above speeds of 40 or 45 MPH. Another issue is that vehicles made after 2011 must come factory equipped with stability control. Studies are showing that such an equipped vehicle tends to have more secondary impacts with other objects on and around the roadway. The level of severity of these secondary impacts increases at speeds above 45 MPH.

[Citation: https://www.researchgate.net/public...ol_and_the_Precision_Immobilization_Technique ]

Automotive engineers have yet to solve all the potential vector factors when a stability controlled vehicle is subjected to the PIT.

If the vehicle was doing 70, 80, or higher, a PIT would have been contraindicated due to the probability of it becoming a high mass projectile with no predictable vector on the road. The simple strand cable median barrier would not have stopped such a vehicle if it were traveling beyond a shallow angle of attack, nor would it have prevented it from vaulting into opposing lanes of traffic.
 

·
Pretty Ladies!
Joined
·
4,983 Posts
Yeesh. Sometimes there are no good solutions. Only less bad ones.
 

·
Massive Member
Joined
·
26,941 Posts
Not to MMQB, but at 6:04 he asks the supervisor if he can PIT him before he gets going to fast.

Should be “too fast”.

Hey, I’m a reserve, I know what I’m qualified to critique and what I’m not. I stay in my lane...

Randy


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,142 Posts
Instead of prohibiting pursuits and blaming the police when they end badly we need to view aggravated fleeing and eluding as a forcible felony likely to cause great bodily harm or death to others and shut them down swiftly and violently. Surviving offenders need to be sent to the movies for a long time. When mopes face real risk for fleeing they may consider their traffic warrant or suspended dl case a better option. There will always be the "you'll never take me alive" bad guys and they should be accommodated swiftly and decisively for the safety of the community.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,333 Posts
Know your target and what is beyond it.
Suspect did not veer into oncoming traffic, pit directed him there.

Seems like they already knew who he was, so easy to find I suppose?

Pit ( or direction of pit) seemed like bad decision at that time. The LEO s already knew they didn't have what they needed to do the job.

Tunnel vision excuse doesn't fly with me. Suspects run away because they are scared, even for minor stuff.

I witnessed a portion of a chase through a parking lot. When the suspect car passed me I got a clear view of him looking back towards the pursuing police car, not where he was going. Police was close on his tail. The police car never showed any hesitations of safety for the area we were in . If anyone had stepped out, neither could have stopped.
only 30 seconds prior, a man and his young daughter had walked the exact spot both vehicles had gone through.
That particular area is difficult to navigate normally due to the high pedestrian traffic. Moses must have parted the sea that day.

What ever the suspect has done, would you kill a child to catch him?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,333 Posts
Law enforcement can be a difficult job depending on the situation. I don't want it.
Sometimes the choice is lesser of two evils.
No matter how it goes, someone will be there to say it could have been done better.

To all the LEOs that try your hardest to do what's right....
Thank You
 

·
Massive Member
Joined
·
26,941 Posts
If only there was a guarantee letting them go would guarantee the public’s safety.

Fleeing suspects plow into children well after pursuits were terminated also.

Supervisors put into the loop to offset some officers making bad pursuit decisions sometimes in the heat of the chase can make you miss good PIT opportunities sometimes and result in taking poor opportunities to PIT, yet may be better than even worse PIT opportunities to come later, or worse outcomes from letting the chase continue. Or they may be caught later with a broken taillight without incident.

Life is uncertain in real time.

These issues tend to become ever clearer the more times you watch the video, I’ve found.

Randy


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
30,698 Posts
Every pursuit should have charges of attempted murder, wreck less endangerment... Brought against driver of car that flees. No allowance to plea away.
Seems there are repeat runners. If they got 8 months for origional crime but 3 yrs NO Parole for running. Even criminals might be smart enough to consider not running in car.

Let it be known dash camera will be watched and every traffic infraction, ever impact, everytime other drivers had to give way. You will be charged. Plus if ANY person n bike, motorcycle, foot comes within danger range you get those also.
Really running from the Police is as dangerous (often has potential to be more) then discharging a firearm wildly in public.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,115 Posts
The best tactic is to take action to avoid a pursuit if possible. Waiting until you can block the vehicle in to light it up. I had a motorcycle merge with the road I was on going 100 mph. I went after him but I didn't light him up. The only reason I caught up with him was he stopped at the toll booth. I went through the toll booth next to him and then backed up and blocked him in and then lit him up. Most motorcycles don't have reverse. He had warrants and was on a suspended license.

Another agency chased a serial bank robber up here. His accomplice pretended to be a hostage. When he didn't drop his pistol, he got a 40 S&W to the face. He got 60 years in Corpus Christi and 75 years in Austin for bank robbery. He got 99 years here for evading arrest. Our DA takes pursuits seriously as it should be everywhere.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top