We have previously written (here and here and here and here) about unnecessary fatalities produced by high-speed chases by police officers — an on-going controversy over the justification for such chases. The latest such controversy occurred in California where Deputy John Swearengin drove through an intersection without his lights on and hit and killed Daniel Hiler, 24, and Chrystal Clevenger, 30. They were pushing a small motorbike across the interaction when hit by Swearengin. He was responding to a call about a stolen vehicle. The police ended up arresting relatives of the deceased who were outraged by the accident.
Family members spend the weekend washing cars to raise money for in Oildale, California for Hiler’s fiancée and two children.
What is interesting is that Sheriff Donny Youngblood said Swearengin “was responding to a report of a stolen vehicle with a suspect still at the scene” when he struck his victims. That would indicate that the suspect was already in custody or at least this was not a chase situation — increasing concerns over the negligence of the officer in the circumstance. One countervailing fact alleged is that the two victims were outside of the crosswalk. That alone, however, does not necessarily bar recovery. Even in a contributory negligence jurisdiction where one percent of negligence by the plaintiff can bar recovery, there are claims of “last clear chance” for inattentive or helpless individuals. Most states, like California, are comparative negligence jurisdictions. In pure comparative states, the negligence of the victims are simply applied against the award to reduce liability. In a modified comparative state, the plaintiffs must be less than 50 percent at fault to recover. California is a pure comparative negligence state.
The police ultimately arrested four relatives of the victims after the police say they got into an “altercation” with California Highway Patrol officers at the scene.
The matter is under criminal investigation, but there would appear grounds for possible civil litigation. A wrongful death action does not have to be filed for at least a year and it is sometime good to see how the criminal investigation will come out. The lack of lights may be key as well as the speed. Witnesses have already claimed that there were no lights and forensics should confirm the likely speed as well as the possible dash cam information.
Investigations have shown police officers in other jurisdictions routinely running red lights.
I do not know the circumstances of the arrest of the relatives, though considerable slack should be given to grieving family members. However, the circumstances of the two fatalities merit both criminal and civil scrutiny.
Source: KGET as first seen on Reddit.
FLOG THE BLOG: Have you voted yet for the top legal opinion blog? WE NEED YOUR VOTE! You can vote at HERE by clicking on the “opinion” category. Voting ends December 31, 2011.
The headline is wrong. It should read county Deputy Sheriff Allegedly Speeds Through Intersection Without Lights, not California Highway Officer.
The police officer who caused this accident, Swearengin, is a Kern County Deputy Sheriff. Traffic accident’s that happen in this county are handled by the California Highway Petrol, not the Sheriff’s department.
The Sheriff’s headquarters, where the county Sheriff’s cars start and end their day, was only 4650 feet farther down the road in the direction the Deputy’s travel.
The relatives were being arrested by the Kern County Deputy Sheriff’s when I was watching the story on the local news.
It doesn’t matter that the pedestrians were not in a crosswalk. Under California law, pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way. It is NEVER legal to run over a pedestrian in California.
At worst, they can get post humous tickets for jaywalking, which their relatives could pay out of the wrongful death settlement.
Okay, that last part is a joke. But pedestrians having the right of way is absolutely true.
The officer did not follow procedure, of having the emergency lights on and the siren,when responding to a call and it caused 2 deaths, the investigation needs to know why and if he was really going to a call, I see manslaughter charges here, after all it was an accident.
I almost got nailed by a squad car this summer.
I was headed through an intersection and never saw him until he blew through his red light, with no lights/siren, nearly clipping the front of my truck, I had to slam on the brakes which almost got me rear-ended.
I happen to be aquainted with the police chief and mentioned it the next time I saw him and his response was “He must have been on his way to a crime or accident scene” which led me to ask about the lack of lights/siren and I was told that “they don’t always use the lights/sirens if they are trying to catch a suspect so that they don’t tip off the suspect”.
The Chief is an upstanding guy, a great police officer…if he thinks so little of his cops blowing through intersections sans warning, then what do no so upstanding police think about it?
According to law, an emergency vehicle consists of emergency lights and siren, both have to be on responding to a call, if not, then it’s not an emergency vehicle, the cop is wrong and so is the police dept, and the city, i see a bug time law suit coming.
OS,
You are right about the jokes writing themselves. Pay money to go to a class on Free Speech???? WTF
I agree with most here that this officer is in serious trouble. A civil suit is likely and as Gene suggested the likely outcome for the state is not good.
The Keystone cops are risible.
Even in my somewhat “classic” jurisdiction which clings to the antiquated notion of contributory negligence, I think this officer would be guilty of gross negligence which would not operate as a bar to the alleged simple negligence of the decedents.
Gene as much as I wear it it should look good on me!
In a section 1983 suit for civil rights violations the plaintiff has to allege that the defendant cop was “acting under color of state law”. The Sheriff will likely defend on the grounds that the emergency lights were not on and hence not under color of law. This cop was just like any other driver in a hurry to get donuts.
But humor aside, the family members arrested should consider filing a section 1983 action for injunctive relief to prevent the police from taking this persecution further. Section 1983 liability can run to a municipality in all states and against Counties where the Sheriff is the culprit in many states, depending how the county government system is formulated. States have sovereign immunity and in some states a county is a subdivision of the state.
The county has a deeper pocket than Sheriff Podunk here.
North Carolina recently prosecuted a deputy sheriff for rear ending another car at a high rate of speed with no emergency lights on. If this guy is not prosecuted then the residents of that county need to replace their prosecutor. They know that they must replace their sheriff and should move on that post haste. And do not let him become the dog catcher–get him out of office completely.
Here is the latest from California. The Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office is offering Occupy L.A. protesters arrested in recent weeks the opportunity to pay $355 for private instructional classes on free speech which will allow them to avoid their court dates.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-occupy-schooling-20111222,0,4087465.story
Sometimes the jokes write themselves.
Frankly,
All peachy when you can calculate the damages beforehand….I am sure the insurance companies would then know how much to charge the municipality before hiring a mental person as a cop…….But they do have to work as well…give em some steroids to workout with…
in the real world, few people are candidates for canonization. OTOH, I’m guessing the cops did whatever they could to coerce some pretext for arrest a,omh the family members.
Frankly, I like that sarcasm. It looks good on you.
YEs, followed by whining about outrageous court settlements. Everything will be just peachy if we could only limit damages
Sounds to me as if the Sheriff is digging a deeper legal hole for the Department. A hole lined with money for somebody.
Gene,
Yep….and I wonder if the intersection cameras data comes up missing or the officers dash or personal recorder information….
Oh, some of that WILL happen
Yeah, I’ll have to agree. I smell a civil suit and one that the state really really doesn’t want to go before a jury. Outrageous.
I don’t know…. States know how to turn the table and make everyone but themselves look guilty.
Seems like a state action exists under a 1983 Action….
This is what they (cops) do. I am not shocked by this. Cops are human and will do anything to cover their own ass just like anyone else.