I don't think you have a very grounded understanding of the law, causation (proximate cause, cause in fact, direct/indirect events, etc.), transferred intent, duties of police officers vs. civilians, etc. I don't agree with your analogy.

Cops are sworn to do certain duties to protect the public but also pursue/stop violent criminals. As long as there's no clearly reckless criminal intervening causation on the police pursuit fault (i.e. he was following protocol, orders, implied or express duties, wasn't intoxicated, car was in working maintained condition, etc.) then fault will be squarely with the fleeing suspect. I suppose it's possible to hold the cop ALSO responsible, if he was careless, but that won't absolve the fleeing suspect whatsoever for creating a chain of events that directly lead to a high speed chase and foreseeable death.

For more on causation, read the law case and similar cases stemming from it - Palsgraf v. Long Island RR. https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/tor ... land-r-co/

You as a civilian owe everyone around you a duty to not harm them. You have no duty or obligation to stop a knife wielding felon. Doing so is at your own peril, legal risk, etc. You shoot and miss, you're going to have some tough questions to answer. Maybe you have a defense and maybe not. Or maybe both of you are charged for the murder - the knife wielder could be charged, but so too could you for recklessness since you had no DUTY to act. Just like you have no duty to make a citizens' arrest - and while you can for felonies generally, you take a lot of civil liability on if you are wrong or it goes south.

So true, and funny as fook.

I just happened to be driving past the Mexican club next to the Shari's literally a couple of minutes after the Kent police showed up en masse. Probably 10 cops and 50 patrons in the club parking lot, which I found out today a shooting happened.

I drove around the mess, past the golf course and over the old bridge, up to the intersection where the wreck happened, before the ambulances arrived. I have never seen that many cop cars in one spot, ever. Had to be at least 15+ cars there, more arriving by the minute, from Renton, Des Moines, Auburn, Normandy Park, and lots of WASPs, too. Went up 516, had to go back down Reith Road to 167, the right lane was open and I could pass, saw a cop administering CPR, turned right to go on 516 to 167, and around the corner near the intersection were another dozem or so cop cars and the pickup truck upside down on the side of the road. Late model Chevy Colorado with Cali plates. Drove down Washington St south, and there were an assorted dozen cop cars all the way to the 277th ST intersection.

I've seen a lot of crap in my life, but never that many cop cars with lights blazing. Even more than in a late night Seattle city shooting a few years ago.


All I thought was damn, something is up, and I ain't carrying right now. *uck me.

I'm aware of the law. I'm aware the dipshit is a dipshit and will be charged for this.

BUT....

I'm upset that a cop would kill another cop, and instead of using it as a training opportunity or evaluate the driving officers' actions, they instantly shift blame.

The perp wasn't driving the cop car.

It's basically saying 'fuck it, we can do what we want, kill who we want, drive reckless all we want, we can just blame the guy running from us'.

I don't think it's a reasonable or expected outcome that a cop would wreck and kill another cop, do you?

If you say 'no', then he shouldn't be charged, not foreseeable.
But, it's 10x worse if you say 'yes, it's foreseeable', because it would be a forgone conclusion that cops will be driving recklessly/dangerously and killing people....

We all know the criminal is a criminal. Stupid is stupid. He's a fuckstick and should be hung for the shit he did, charging him for negligence of an officer is dumb, IMO, as pointed out above.

I 100% don't expect cops to be driving recklessly and killing someone, even when chasing someone, ESPECIALLY another cop.

Most agencies have pursuit policies for a reason...


Why was the officer driving so fast that he didn't see/couldn't stop? I doubt he was going '35 in a 35'...

I'm sure you're familiar with contributory negligence... and I understand civil/criminal language, and it doesn't apply apples to apples because you can't say someone is only guilty of x% of a crime...

This isn't a dog running into the road, or a street sign that got ran over, it's another cop. Surely something could have been done differently to prevent him from losing his life...right?

I refuse to accept that a cop lost his life because another cop 'didn't have any other choice'...

Information is slim right now, admittedly.

As pointed out, if the suspect pushed his car into the lane occupied by the cop, yes, 100% BG fault.

If the cop was driving too fast for conditions and just didn't see the other cop, it's his fault

If the dead cop jumped in front of the other officers car, not focusing on it but on the suspect vehicle instead (Tunnel vision will do that), it's mostly the dead cops fault, and partially the cop that hit him for not slowing or changing driving behavior, but too many variables apply.

I'm pissed an innocent cop is dead, we all know the fucktard is a fucktard.

I just want answers as to why a cop is dead, at the hand of another cop, and 'It's HIS fault!' ain't gonna cut it...

TW, I'm really troubled that a cop is dead.

But absent a clear and convincing finding that the other patrol officer acted recklessly, he's not to blame b/c it's an accident. Accidents don't require negligence. They are simply unfortunate events.

It's also troubling that a seemingly growing anti-LEO mentality always wants to hold the RESPONDING law enforcement to blame for the CHAIN OF EVENTS SET FORTH BY A CRIMINAL. I really don't think you, and a lot of society, grasps this. I see this often, here and elsewhere, where the clearly anti-LEO folks blame the cop for shooting a suspect when he draws a gun, points a gun, reaches for no-no spots when told not to, and so forth. RARELY is it the cops fault (sometimes it is, in the totality, when cops act unreasonably). But when a perp points a gun or speeding car at the public, the perp is going to pay a high price for his perp behavior, and any foreseeable consequences for emergency responders.

When a person sets an emergency response illegally in motion (i.e. prank fire alarm setting forth an emergency response that runs over a pedestrian; calling in a prank bomb threat that causes someone harm in the response; pranking someone by telling them their husband has died and is in the hospital and they suffer a heart attack or rush to the hospital and die in an accident; etc.), said person is GOING TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND RIGHTLY SO. It's, again, called causation. It's not a super complex concept, but there are multiple degrees. Direct causation, proximate cause, sole cause, joint causes, intervening causation, etc.

Also, you're not understanding that a SPECIFIC event is not required for there to be foreseeability. It's the general nature of an event that is certainly foreseeable consequence of an action. A car accident is absolutely within that realm of foreseeable. A plane crash due to a distracted pilot who sees the car accident is an example of something probably not foreseeable.

The nature of firing a gun in public, illegally, and then leading cops on a high speed chase entails a host of foreseeable consequences including a shooting, a car accident, hit pedestrians, etc. Police forces have weighed those risks against public need to chase fleeing suspects. Again, provided the cop acted reasonably within SOPs, had training, the vehicles properly maintained... I can see no culpability by the police in this tragic accident. 100% the fault of the perp.

I'll preface this response by saying that I'm not taking sides one way or the other on this story - I don't have enough information. An officer lost his life, a woman lost her husband, and another officer has to come to grips with the fact that he played a role in it. That's just a shitty situation all around.

I believe it's important that we don't fall into the trap of equating a healthy questioning of authority with being anti-authority. Just because someone reads the story one way and questions the official narrative does not make that person anti-official. In fact, I think we all ought to do more questioning of authority, even if it's an authority we generally support.

I also believe it's equally important that we ensure we apply the same standards to all people, regardless of their profession. If I fire a bullet from my gun and fatally strike someone on accident, I fully expect to have the blame for their lost life placed squarely on my shoulders - even if it was an honest mistake. It's possible to bear the responsibility for an accident without being guilty of a crime. Shit happens sometimes. If the State is going to hold us non-LEOs accountable for our honest mistakes and place the blame squarely on our shoulders, then the same ought to be true when the subject in question is a LEO. But there are a lot of special treatments/exceptions carved out for LEOs that we don't get to enjoy. I don't think it's wrong to question that inequality.

Very sad, I will probably go place flowers since I live so close.

I also don't agree with someone being labeled anti-cop because he believes that LEO should be held to the same standards as citizens.

Are citizens required to pursue fleeing armed felons in high speed pursuit?

Way to completely miss the point.

Do you believe LEO should be entitled to own weapons that the average law abiding American is forbidden to own?

Irrelevant to the conversation. Please answer the relevant question. LEOS, by virtue of duty and responsibilities and being paid to risk their lives, are put in routine situations civilians rarely/never see.

When was the last time you as a civilian had to draw a gun on someone or pursue a armed fleeing suspect?

Then you and the rest of the people in this thread must be having a way different conversation.

I'm going to get off the computer and go place flowers now. Have a nice day.

The arm chair quarterbacking in this thread is Pro Bowl worthy.

Tragic & preventable loss of life. Thoughts, prayers & condolences to the fallen officer's family, loved ones & the department. Also prayers for the officer who was driving, I'm sure regardless of the circumstances, he in no way thought he'd kill one of his own. The bad guys however could care less.

Most things are avoidable. When a pedestrian is hit, cops ask how fast you were going, if your eyes were on the road, etc. I've said numerous times if you're in the road, outside a crosswalk, it's your own damn fault you got hit. This situation seems a bit different. The driving officer should have known the other officer was deploying stop sticks in a given area, they communicate these things. I think the most likely scenario (again, limited info, admitted conjecture) is that both cops had tunnel vision and were paying attention to the fleeing vehicle. Cop 2 ran into the roadway to deploy stop sticks, cop 1 going 'pursuit speeds' ie well above the speed limit, didn't see the cop 2 until it was too late and ran him over.

That's not 'accidents happen'....That's a clusterfuck, or to quote a meme... "You want a safety briefing? Because that's how you get a safety briefing."



Questioning authority/'the official story' and/or requesting accountability is not anti-cop. You cannot blame the criminal for negligence on the officers part.



Interestingly, you'll note in each case the state says 'emergency vehicles can....' they specifically state they can't drive like an asshole. A cop is dead, I'd say that's 'without due regard to the safety of all persons', wouldn't you?

I just don't see a scenario, other than the perp pushing the cop car into the wrong lane, where cop 1 and/or cop 2 don't shoulder the majority of the blame for this. You can sit there and say 'but he was chasing someone'... Cool, here's a cookie, doesn't mean he gets to drive recklessly, or jump in front of a car....




and this is relevant how? Have you ever seen me post about a guy pointing a gun at a cop and saying he shouldn't have been shot?



Uh huh... and if the responding officer is driving 110 MPH in a 35, blowing through red lights and T-bones a car?




'accident' vs negligence/carelessness.

Someone committing a crime does not give LE carte blanche, and blame anything bad that happens on the criminal.



Again, 'pedestrian hit' signals that you think it's expected for cops to hit pedestrians during a pursuit, that basically means that it's an acceptable loss to pursue/catch the bad guy. I find that unacceptable. Same goes for the idiot cops that PIT a vehicle going 80 MPH in heavy traffic, then blame the perp when the vehicle crashes into the opposing lanes and sends 3 people to the hospital in critical condition. The cop caused the vehicle to go out of control into opposing traffic.