California State Senate Judiciary Committee
Candy Priano's Testimony
April 27, 2004
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger repeated one word
during his campaign. That word
is "accountability." I
have read numerous reports on the topic of police pursuit since my
innocent daughter Kristie was killed in a Chico pursuit where officers
disregarded guidelines in their own pursuit policy.
In
an Illinois report, a retired police chief writes: "Perhaps the most important and most frequently missing
component of the four areas for control of police pursuits is the
accountability factor. This
is difficult to understand because the absence of accountability
clearly demonstrates to all concerned that policy, training and
supervision are meaningless when there are no consequences for ignoring
them. If, for instance,
officers were not held accountable for compliance with their firearm policies, does anyone doubt that we would have many more bad shootings? The fact is that police pursuits seriously injure and kill far
more innocent third parties than a bullet from an officers' firearm. Officers are strictly prohibited from firing into a crowd, but
they are routinely given the latitude to pursue a stolen car through
urban streets against traffic control devices until a collision
terminates the chase."
Two
weeks ago, I shared with the Public Safety Committee the issue of
public safety in police pursuit. I
expressed my belief that law enforcement does care about the victims of
police pursuits, but I was surprised when the officer
associations opposed SB 1866, claiming:
- The criminals will get away,
and
- taxpayers will pay for because of litigation claims against
cities and counties.
Regarding
the first concern, I have learned that officers can catch " the
bad guys" without pursuits; these officers are just doing their job in a
more sophisticated way: a safer way.
On
Jan. 20, 2004, the news headline read: "Police Quit Chase and Still
Make Arrest." In the
story Lt. Chris Davis of the Temecula PD said: "I would like to
think the pursuit would have been cancelled regardless.
It would have been a poor decision to continue to chase the
vehicle when we could identify the driver."
On
April 12, a Channel 3 news broadcast from Palm Springs reported that
some state police have come out against the bill.
But Cpl. Dennis Gutierrez of the Riverside County Sheriffs
Depart. said, "If the bill does pass, it won't stop us from
catching the bad guys. We
can put out a warrant, we can pick them up at their home, they have
families in the area."
On
April 21, Sunnyvale Lt. George McCloskey sent me an email which read, "Just last week we had a pursuit begin in Sunnyvale, only to be
terminated by the initiating officer shortly after he was able to
determine that the costs outweighed the benefits of the chase. The officer was able to obtain a
license plate and do it differently, perhaps saving a life in the
meantime. I cannot say that his actions were totally related to our
recent training where you and Mark talked to our officers about pursuit from a
victims' perspective; however, if we reached just one officer and
prevented just one tragedy, we have done our job as Law Enforcement
Trainers!
"
The
topic of police pursuit is a volatile issue within law enforcement
agencies, so I asked the Lt. if
I could use his email at this hearing.
His response:
"Please
use the email in your testimony and mention that during your
presentation to our Department that the overwhelming response from
line-level officers, supervisors, and command staff is one of support
for safer apprehension of criminals, and the public. The way we do our
jobs is determined by the public we serve, and it is our responsibility
to deliver the best service with their safety in mind. No one wants to
be involved in a tragedy, and no criminal is worth catching if others
are hurt or killed in the process. For a law enforcement manager
to cling to tools of the past, negates the ingenuity and dedication of
those who now perform the law enforcement role with distinction."
In
sharp contrast to the Sunnyvale story, the following story was posted at 8:26
a.m. on April 24, 2004: The
CHP reported Saturday night that a Solano
County Sheriff Deputy was the victim of a fatal crash while
pursuing a speeding vehicle. As
the sheriff's vehicle exited a curve in the road the vehicle's right
tire entered the dirt on the edge of the roadway and hit a large rock,
overturning the patrol unit. The
deputy who was driving was ejected and thrown into a water-filled
ditch. The deputy
succumbed to his injuries at the hospital, and his passenger suffered
minor injuries.
And
this brings me to the second reason why officer associations and the
Attorney General's Office are opposed to SB 1866: Litigation
costs and the taxpayers will pay.
I
can tell you the death of a loved one killed in a preventable tragedy is immeasurable. My Kristie was a special gift from God. She was an honor student, a class officer, an athlete, and
most important, a loving daughter and devoted sister. She was a
law-abiding citizen and a community volunteer. Kristie will always be remembered for her tireless work at the
Chico Creek Nature Center where she fed and took care of injured
animals in Bidwell Park. She was always ready to volunteer for any
worthwhile project in the community and was just a month away from her first mission trip to care
for children in an orphanage in Costa Rica.
But if officer associations want to look at cost, I will share
with them that two insurance companies paid more than $200,000 each for
medical expenses and other compensation (counseling services, on-going
medical expenses, etc.) because we asked the doctors to do whatever
they needed to do to save our daughter, that a third insurance company paid
$60,000 and another $15,000. Two totaled vehicles came to about $50,000, and burial
expenses were $20,000. I
was unable to go back to work for four months and then I returned on a
very limited part-time basis. About
two months after Kristie was killed, I was again taken to the hospital
because I kept calling out for Kristie and didn't believe my husband
when he told me Kristie was dead. Because of my absence, a temporary employee was hired to fill
in. I too work for the
State of California, so the state paid for that cost and I collected
sick leave benefits. Both
my family and the City of Chico hired attorneys. My understanding is that the city hired a very expensive
attorney before we even filed our lawsuit against the city, so there
were litigation costs.
Now
for this sheriff's deputy who was just killed.
The deputy's family and friends are just beginning to process
their loss. Again, it's
immeasurable. The
Department of General Services can tell you how much a patrol car
costs, a conservative estimate is $35,000, but make/model, types of
equipment (computers, lights, decals, paint scheme) can dramatically
increase the cost. Survivors
benefits to family members of officers killed in the line of duty need
to be paid. I don't know
the amounts or the full extent of these benefits. There may also
be some educational benefits for the surviving children of such
officers. The cost of injured officers is probably captured by
individual agencies, but it may also be reported to the State
Department of Industrial Relations. Incarceration for those who
flee and end up killing an innocent victim and court costs vary for
many reasons. So I hope the Attorney Governor's Office now realizes that the taxpayers are paying (pause) and many
of us taxpayers are paying
too high a price for unnecessary police pursuits.
Had
the Chico police followed their own pursuit policy, there would have
been no insurance claims to file and no litigation because there would
not have been a pursuit. According
to the Chico policy, since officers knew the identity and address of
the juvenile they could have caught her later -- similar to what
Temecula PD and the Sunnyvale officer did. Instead officers chased the
girl at high speeds through 100 percent residential with narrow street
and poor visibility at night.
Since
California leads the nation in the number of innocent victims killed,
maimed, and injured in pursuits, I urge law enforcement to collaborate
with Senator Aanestad by providing information that will make SB 1866
the means to prevent a new generation of innocent victims of pursuits.
In
closing, Chief Steven Jones of the Orange County (Florida)
Sheriff's Department says it perfectly: "Our 'jobs' are to make
our streets as safe as possible, not the opposite. Law
enforcement agencies need to answer one question: Is it worth the
lives and safety of our officers and citizens to chase traffic
offenders? ... Several years ago we updated our policy to discontinue
pursuits of stolen vehicles. Many
complained that it opened the door for car thieves to escape justice
and more cars would be stolen. In
fact, just the opposite happened.
Stolen car crashes went to zero and our capture rate soared
sky-high! We simply
re-evaluated the old way of catching criminals and started 'Auto
Trap.' The police
mentality that the bad guys will always run if they know that we
can't pursue is nonsense! We
disproved that theory years before when we decided not to pursue
traffic offenders."
-
|
