Deadly force in high-speed pursuit is reasonable, rules U.S. Supreme Court.

• Author: Lewis, Scott

Byline: Scott Lewis

In Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U. S. 1 (1985), the U.S. Supreme Court abrogated the common law rule that police can always use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing felon. Garner involved deadly force by use of a firearm. The question has always remained open as to whether deadly force can be used in the context of another potentially lethal weapon: an automobile. In Scott v. Harris, 2007 WL 1237851, decided April 30, 2007, the court reached what will probably prove to be a controversial conclusion: "A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death." Victor Harris was 19 years old in March 2001, when he attempted to outrun several Coweta County, Georgia, sheriff's deputies. The first deputy clocked Harris' speed at 73 miles per hour in a 55 zone. When the deputy activated his light bar, Harris accelerated to speeds of 90 miles per hour, crossed over double-yellow no-passing-zone lines, and ran two red lights. The deputy broadcast Harris's license number and that he was in pursuit, although he did not give out the underlying charge, which was speeding. Deputy Timothy Scott picked up the pursuit. Harris drove into a nearby shopping mall, where police, including Scott, attempted to box him in. Harris tried to swerve around Scott's squad car, but dinged the squad car in his effort to escape. Harris made it out of the shopping mall and continued his high-speed flight on a two lane highway. As Scott caught up to Harris, he radioed in to his supervisor and requested permission to do a Precision Intervention Technique (PIT) maneuver. This method of terminating a high-speed pursuit involves the officer striking the fleeing car in a specific point and placing the fleeing car into a spin. Scott had not been trained in the PIT stop, but he received permission. Scott realized that he could not do the PIT stop on Harris due to their high rate of speed at the time, so he rammed Harris with his push bumper. Harris lost control of his car, went down an embankment and crashed. Harris was not wearing a seatbelt and ended up a quadriplegic as a result of the crash. Harris sued Scott and others involved under 42 USC s. 1983, alleging excessive force under the Fourth Amendment. Scott moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. The district...