Rider Killed After Being Rammed During Police Chase…Was It Justified?

[Chrisj CMA]

My reasoning when I say this is justified:

I have a very nice .357 revolver 4" barrel very accurate and fun to shoot.  When I have the gun at a range or in the woods target shooting its a fantastic piece of sporting equipment.  Safely utilized it doesn't really pose much of a threat to anyone.  However, I also conceal carry this same revolver.  It is no longer a fun piece of sporting equipment when I step out of my house and into the public.  It is a lethal weapon. 

If I choose to use that lethal weapon in an unsafe way in public and a police officer asks me to stop, and I refuse and keep on using that gun in an unsafe manner, I would think you all would agree the cop would and should use his lethal weapon to make the situation safe for everyone.

This is exactly the scenario with the man on his motorcycle.  A motorcycle is fun, its transportation when properly ridden.  However, that rider turned his bike into a lethal weapon and refused to stop endangering others with it.  He was taken out.  I doubt the cop intended to kill him so his death WAS (IMHO) accidental.  But he did intend to stop him most likely knowing full well that injury or death to the rider could be an outcome. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

I'll have to add myself to those surprising the meathead. 

It's not the first time you surprised me. Nor do I doubt it will be the last. 

[ValkISDan]

The cop could have left him alone but they are the law and they chase bad guys every now and then. Mr and Mrs dumbass we regret to inform you that your son was an idiot, endangered the lives of many people, and died running from the police in a high speed chase. We need to stop blaming the wrong side in clear acts of stupidity. Too bad it appeared to be a nice bike.

[Pappy!]

For those who are saying he died while running from the police or that he died because he chose to run from the police.
He died because he was rammed from behind by a Sherriff. For speeding.

Maybe he stole it? Maybe he had pot on him? Last time I checked you do not end a man's life on "maybe's".
So, for those who think it was justified. I guess it would be justified if the cop pulled out a gun and shot him to death for speeding?
Same outcome.....different deadly weapon.

[Moonshot_1]

Running from the Police at 100+ mph through intersection and stop lights is not speeding. It is mayhem.
The officer would have loved to stop him for speeding. Might even give him a warning. But the rider, instead of stopping for just speeding decided to raise the stakes to the point of his life. Obviously he lost.

The rider made a decision to risk not only himself but the community at large. The Officer ended it. Was there intent to kill? Of course not. The rider risked his own life and lost. The rider was willing to risk the community at large as well.

Hardly just about a speeding infraction.

[signart]

For those who are saying he died while running from the police or that he died because he chose to run from the police.
He died because he was rammed from behind by a Sherriff. For speeding.

Maybe he stole it? Maybe he had pot on him? Last time I checked you do not end a man's life on "maybe's".
So, for those who think it was justified. I guess it would be justified if the cop pulled out a gun and shot him to death for speeding?
Same outcome.....different deadly weapon.

Same thing I was thinking. Why didn't he just shoot him or ram him sooner to avoid all the danger of putting the public in a position to be harmed, if that was the purpose of ending the chase. Far as I'm concerned PO might as well have been flinging bullets indiscriminately if he's going to give that idiot any reason to ride a deadly projectile wildly through traffic where an innocent person could be the one to end up dead. The rider was willing to risk the community at large and so was the PO. Expect the PO should know better.

[Tundra]

 Zero compassion for the rider who is solely responsible for HIS actions which caused police reactions. His failure to comply with LEO brought him the end results. Huge problem in this country and this generation is not taking responsibility for ones own actions, always pointing blame fingers elsewhere.
It's tragic that he made such poor decisions that cost him his life. HIS BAD

[Hooter]

In this situation the rider had a complete disregard for life,,,, to include his own. The end result, sadly,  was the copulation  of several circumstances that ended the wrong way. Need to read the article and watch the video to get a full understanding of what happened from a rational standpoint.  Not just that the officer rammed and killed the man. This whole incident had a terrible outcome. I'm certain, more  than anyone, it wasn't the officers preference.

[Gavin_Sons]

For those who are saying he died while running from the police or that he died because he chose to run from the police.
He died because he was rammed from behind by a Sherriff. For speeding.

Maybe he stole it? Maybe he had pot on him? Last time I checked you do not end a man's life on "maybe's".
So, for those who think it was justified. I guess it would be justified if the cop pulled out a gun and shot him to death for speeding?
Same outcome.....different deadly weapon.

disagree, The officer gave him plenty of opportunities to pull over, he chose not to. I don't see how some can stand behind the biker when he was clearly in the wrong. If he had just pulled over yeah he probably would have gone to jail for having pot on him but he would still be breathing. I'd take jail anytime over my life. As someone else pointed out, just because we ride does not mean we have to take the bikers side every time.

[cookiedough]

Everyone knows unless on a NON Harley (Vrod excluded), you are not outrunning the police.. 

I think it looks like at the end the biker slowed down and the cop did accidentally tap him and by going pretty close a few times it showed the biker he cannot outrun the office putzing along at a mere 100 mph.  Need a 1000cc crotch rocket to do that able to go over 130 mph. 

100 mph is nothing am sure all of us can do that and certainly a police car can as well very easily.  What a dummy, now a dead dummy...

[signart]

Not taking up for the idiot biker. The cop compounded the danger to the public, himself and the rider many times over. Little difference between what the cop did shooting the black guy in the back as he ran from the traffic stop because he had warrants that is in the news lately. If you struggle or threaten a cop, you deserve all you get.
This officer brought grief to himself and most likely to his livelihood and could have been way worse if an innocent pedestrian or driver/rider got caught in the path of either of these knumbskulls for a speeding violation.

[Chrisj CMA]

Not taking up for the idiot biker. The cop compounded the danger to the public, himself and the rider many times over. Little difference between what the cop did shooting the black guy in the back as he ran from the traffic stop because he had warrants that is in the news lately. If you struggle or threaten a cop, you deserve all you get.
This officer brought grief to himself and most likely to his livelihood and could have been way worse if an innocent pedestrian or driver/rider got caught in the path of either of these knumbskulls for a speeding violation.

No, big difference!  The unarmed man the cop shot in the back was a danger to NO ONE.  This guy on the Harley was an danger to a lot of people. 

The argument can be made about Policy and procedure.  In California I do believe they have many areas where the policy is to NOT chase a high speed runner with a car.  They use helicopters sometimes when available.  However, most precincts still give chase. 

The policy isn't the subject here.  Once in a chase your goal is to END it.  The cop ended it reasonably given the circumstances.  I believe the time was 6 minutes or so. 

[signart]

If the goal is to end it, at 2 min 29 sec GPS at 26 mph going around a corner perfect time to end it. The longer it goes on, compounds the danger many times over.
If the biker is a danger to the public at 100 mph, the pursuer doubles the danger  and more so with a bigger, heavier projectile at 100 mph. Who's is suppose to end that? Two bad choices don't make a good choice.
If the biker dude had been on a murder rampage, I say stand on it until you feel bump bump.
Should a cop go after somebodies 15 yr. old grandson on his dirtbike because he's not supposed to be on the road until he ends it? Should the kid keep going because he don't want to get caught on the street on a dirtbike? No, but he shouldn't have to die.

[Gavin_Sons]

everyone can think what they want. I'm right in my own mind. 

[..]

Haven't read all the posts.

As the cop catches up to the bike the bike is on the WRONG SIDE OF THE ROAD. The bike is doing about 62mph at that point. The bike should have stopped at that point. Simple as that.

In my mind that means the rider could be low blood sugar. OR drunk, illegal drugs or legal drugs with an obvious disregard for any other road users.

The rider then accelerates away form the cop. Second big mistake.

The rider then commits a few minor traffic offenses in front of the cop. Third big mistake.

The rider then blows a red light. Fourth big mistake and once again showing a clear disregard for other road users and pedestrians.

The rider then accelerates to speed limit breaking again. Fifth big mistake.

The rider runs at over 100 mph in a business/residential? area. Sixth big mistake.

The rider gets close to blowing a second red light and then does blow a red light at a speed he couldn't have stopped at if another vehicle was crossing in front of him. Seventh big mistake.

Rider blows another red light.

How long do you let him continue / how long do you continue the chase putting others at risk.

At this point it's up to the local PD's policy and the ensuing investigation the LEO in the car knows will happen.

I couldn't hear the radio talk to hear whether the cop was being told to keep on the chase or to drop back.

I'm not going to armchair quarter back this apart from saying the bike should have stopped as soon as the cop car and blue lights and siren appeared behind him whilst the bike was on the wrong side of the road.

Was the rider looking for a last suicide run????

[..]

The link has this

"On Wednesday, April 19, at around 11:55 PM, a sheriff’s deputy with the Berkeley County Sheriff’s Department in South Carolina observed a motorcycle going approximately 66 MPH in a 45 MPH zone"

Yet the cop was traveling at speeds up to and in excess of 100mph for about 43 secs before I could see the tail light of the bike.

[Hooter]

Typically a road Sgt will control a chase. Time of day, traffic, pedestrian and vehicular,  location just to name a few perameters all play into weather a chase continues. There was radio traffic but not discernable.  Could have been traffic between the officer involved and the command officer.  But that is speculation.

An officer in a patrol car is visually and audibly visible and requesting right away. Don't believe the biker had those abilities. I don't believe there is an officer around that wouldn't have chased this guy.

What if's and speculation don't work in this case. Until you've been there don't be so quick to criticize. All that's being seen by some here is that fuc*ing cop ran over a biker. Sad.

[3fan4life]

While I agree that the police perform a necessary and thankless job.

I don't agree with those who tend to support them blindly, police officers are not infallible.


Was the guy on the motorcycle behaving like an idiot?

Certainly!

Did he deserve to die for his idiocy?

Certainly Not!


Don't forget that NONE of us were as mature at 30 as we are now.

To those that are in vehement support of the officer's actions and saying that the biker got what he deserved ,  I'll bet that if this guy was your 30yr old son you'd be singing a different tune entirely.

I know of two police chases in our area that ended in the death of innocent bystanders. In both cases they were killed by a collision with the pursuing officer's vehicle

The following is from the comments section of the article:

" This officer used excessive (deadly) force and had an extreme lack of good judgement. Just because someone breaks the law and in this case a relatively minor violation, or even runs from police, the police are allowed only to use a reasonable continuum of force not excessive force to apprehend a subject. Certainly after the first near miss the deputy should have recognized the inherent danger of the chase and thereafter maintained a safe distance for the pursuit. This was not an instantaneous exigent circumstance but instead transpired over several minutes; more than enough time for this officer to constrain his reaction to the situation."

The poster identifies himself as a police officer with 23 yrs of experience.


I have two coworkers that are former police officers, both with 20+ years of experience. Both agree that the biker needed to be stopped. Both agree that the use of lethal force was not justified.

Both do also believe that the officer did not intend to kill the biker, but that he should have known that it was a possibility.

One of them was a field supervisor prior to his retirement. He also stated that in a case like this it would've been his responsibility to monitor the chase and make a determination as to whether to continue the chase or call it off.

He talked about this situation being a "NO WIN" situation for the officers involved. He stated that if the guy had committed a violent crime or went on to commit a violent crime and they failed to stop him, there would be a public outcry. Just as by killing the guy in the process of stopping him has resulted in a public outcry.

He did say that most departments had a policy that if the person fleeing could be identified and hadn't just committed a violent crime. That they  were to discontinue the chase and seek arrest warrants.

He also stated that most police departments don't teach the use of pit maneuvers on motorcycles.

My other coworker stated that his department had considered putting the bumper against the back tire of a fleeing motorcycle. He also stated that this would be considered potentially lethal force and that its use would have to be justified in the same way as shooting a suspect.   


I also personally know an officer that had a reputation for going after motorcycles and their riders. One night he  was chasing a 19 y/o on a motorcycle. During the course of the chase the 19 y/o was killed when broadsided an 18 wheeler in the middle on an intersection. This 19 y/o turned out to be a friend of the officer's 19 y/o son. the officer was NEVER the same person again. 


This is not an easy situation to armchair quarterback.

The biker in the video is doing some stupid things indeed.

I believe that either he was a greatly inexperienced rider or he was impaired. 

I also don't believe that the officer intended to kill him.

The bottom line is that he is dead and the officer is going to have to live with killing him for the rest of his life.

Both are senseless and tragic.


To those who feel so callous about this 30 y/o losing his life:

I ask you, Where is your sense of compassion? 

A life has ended before it has really even began.

I'm certain that his family is devastated.

I'm equally certain that the officer is second guessing his actions and that his life will never be the same again.

There is no clear right or wrong here. 

[Varmintmist]

Justified the instant he was going 105 in the opposite lanes. 

To further the firearm analogy, If a person is at the range and it has a 3 round limit, and he is shooting 6, then he is told to stop and leave. Is it a big deal? Nope, but it is breaking the rules.
Instead, he reloads and starts shooting into the lobby. Is it justified to stop him by any means possible?

The rider dropped to 30mph and the cop DID NOT hit him, then he took off back up to 100, so when he slowed down again the cop didnt drop off, he made a calculation and hit the rider. The riders previous actions caused the crash.

[Gavin_Sons]

While I agree that the police perform a necessary and thankless job.

I don't agree with those who tend to support them blindly, police officers are not infallible.


Was the guy on the motorcycle behaving like an idiot?

Certainly!

Did he deserve to die for his idiocy?

Certainly Not!


Don't forget that NONE of us were as mature at 30 as we are now.

To those that are in vehement support of the officer's actions and saying that the biker got what he deserved ,  I'll bet that if this guy was your 30yr old son you'd be singing a different tune entirely.

I know of two police chases in our area that ended in the death of innocent bystanders. In both cases they were killed by a collision with the pursuing officer's vehicle

The following is from the comments section of the article:

" This officer used excessive (deadly) force and had an extreme lack of good judgement. Just because someone breaks the law and in this case a relatively minor violation, or even runs from police, the police are allowed only to use a reasonable continuum of force not excessive force to apprehend a subject. Certainly after the first near miss the deputy should have recognized the inherent danger of the chase and thereafter maintained a safe distance for the pursuit. This was not an instantaneous exigent circumstance but instead transpired over several minutes; more than enough time for this officer to constrain his reaction to the situation."

The poster identifies himself as a police officer with 23 yrs of experience.


I have two coworkers that are former police officers, both with 20+ years of experience. Both agree that the biker needed to be stopped. Both agree that the use of lethal force was not justified.

Both do also believe that the officer did not intend to kill the biker, but that he should have known that it was a possibility.

One of them was a field supervisor prior to his retirement. He also stated that in a case like this it would've been his responsibility to monitor the chase and make a determination as to whether to continue the chase or call it off.

He talked about this situation being a "NO WIN" situation for the officers involved. He stated that if the guy had committed a violent crime or went on to commit a violent crime and they failed to stop him, there would be a public outcry. Just as by killing the guy in the process of stopping him has resulted in a public outcry.

He did say that most departments had a policy that if the person fleeing could be identified and hadn't just committed a violent crime. That they  were to discontinue the chase and seek arrest warrants.

He also stated that most police departments don't teach the use of pit maneuvers on motorcycles.

My other coworker stated that his department had considered putting the bumper against the back tire of a fleeing motorcycle. He also stated that this would be considered potentially lethal force and that its use would have to be justified in the same way as shooting a suspect.   


I also personally know an officer that had a reputation for going after motorcycles and their riders. One night he  was chasing a 19 y/o on a motorcycle. During the course of the chase the 19 y/o was killed when broadsided an 18 wheeler in the middle on an intersection. This 19 y/o turned out to be a friend of the officer's 19 y/o son. the officer was NEVER the same person again. 


This is not an easy situation to armchair quarterback.

The biker in the video is doing some stupid things indeed.

I believe that either he was a greatly inexperienced rider or he was impaired. 

I also don't believe that the officer intended to kill him.

The bottom line is that he is dead and the officer is going to have to live with killing him for the rest of his life.

Both are senseless and tragic.


To those who feel so callous about this 30 y/o losing his life:

I ask you, Where is your sense of compassion? 

A life has ended before it has really even began.

I'm certain that his family is devastated.

I'm equally certain that the officer is second guessing his actions and that his life will never be the same again.

There is no clear right or wrong here. 

I'm 31 and am much more mature than everyone you speak of when they were my age. Or is it because I was taught at a young age to obey laws and do what the police ask you to do?

[J.Mencalice]

The conversation...

God: "So how did you get here, son?"

Pursuant:  "Well God, I ran from the cops on my motorcycle at about 100 MPH in the middle of the night."

God: "You are a freakin' dumb ass, son."

I wonder what the autopsy report will read?

[signart]

Justified the instant he was going 105 in the opposite lanes. 

To further the firearm analogy, If a person is at the range and it has a 3 round limit, and he is shooting 6, then he is told to stop and leave. Is it a big deal? Nope, but it is breaking the rules.
Instead, he reloads and starts shooting into the lobby. Is it justified to stop him by any means possible?

The rider dropped to 30mph and the cop DID NOT hit him, then he took off back up to 100, so when he slowed down again the cop didnt drop off, he made a calculation and hit the rider. The riders previous actions caused the crash.

You could say if the person has a three round limit and he exceeds the limit he should be murdered after the 4th round because he exceeded the limit. Who knows who he might have injured after breaking the rules. Why take a chance. End it, the sooner the better.
 
If the cop needed to drop him, he had a perfect chance when he dropped to 26 mph. after chasing him at over 100 mph.One thing about it..."That SOB will never speed again in this town"

[Dave Ritsema]

Some very good points there 3Fan.
I consider myself EXTREMELY pro law enforcement. In over 27 years in the fire service I have had their back and they have had mine. Yes, that young man certainly was in the wrong and could have averted this tragedy by simply pulling over as he should have. But I also have seen the effects of high speed chases that ended badly with innocent bystanders by both police and bad guys.

To those that cling to the notion that the motorcyclist endangered others (and he did) I would also submit to you that the LEO with his half ton SUV posed an even greater danger to others. If police were originally called out because this kid was riding 20 mph over the limit was that really justification to escalate the situation to the extent that they did? If the chase would have been stopped do you really think the guy that was originally going 20 mph over would keep going over 100 after he was no longer being pursued?  I doubt it. Maybe no one else in this forum will admit to it but I ran from the police several times in my late teens, early 20's during my hot rod days. The guy was stupid but he wasn't a serial killer. If he got away that time was it really that big of a deal? The officer was clearly close enough to get his tags several times and had him on dash cam. They could have easily picked him up later at home.

There has been many conversations in the law enforcement community about the risk vs reward of high speed chases. The LEOS get all amped up chasing someone (understandably) and it can turn into a bad situation quickly because their judgement becomes impaired by the "thrill of the chase".

I personally support better defined rules of engagement for high speed chases. It will save lives on both sides of the badge and help prevent at least some future tragedies.

[3fan4life]

Some very good points there 3Fan.
I consider myself EXTREMELY pro law enforcement. In over 27 years in the fire service I have had their back and they have had mine. Yes, that young man certainly was in the wrong and could have averted this tragedy by simply pulling over as he should have. But I also have seen the effects of high speed chases that ended badly with innocent bystanders by both police and bad guys.

To those that cling to the notion that the motorcyclist endangered others (and he did) I would also submit to you that the LEO with his half ton SUV posed an even greater danger to others. If police were originally called out because this kid was riding 20 mph over the limit was that really justification to escalate the situation to the extent that they did? If the chase would have been stopped do you really think the guy that was originally going 20 mph over would keep going over 100 after he was no longer being pursued?  I doubt it. Maybe no one else in this forum will admit to it but I ran from the police several times in my late teens, early 20's during my hot rod days. The guy was stupid but he wasn't a serial killer. If he got away that time was it really that big of a deal? The officer was clearly close enough to get his tags several times and had him on dash cam. They could have easily picked him up later at home.

There has been many conversations in the law enforcement community about the risk vs reward of high speed chases. The LEOS get all amped up chasing someone (understandably) and it can turn into a bad situation quickly because their judgement becomes impaired by the "thrill of the chase".

I personally support better defined rules of engagement for high speed chases. It will save lives on both sides of the badge and help prevent at least some future tragedies.

I'll admit it.

Many times, especially when riding a dirt bike on the street before I was old enough to get a license.

Several of us had a Wile E Coyote vs Roadrunner thing going on with the local deputies back then.

And a few times on a street bike when I was able to get a good jump on them.

I will admit also that if they had ever gotten close I would've pulled over instead of leading them on an extended high speed chase.

That was all in my early teens and twenties and through the grace of God I lived to grow up.



Again I will say to those who have so adamantly stated that the biker "Got what he deserved".

If that was your 30 y/o child or grandchild You would NOT be singing the same song!    



The police absolutely have the right to use lethal force when the situation calls for it.

However, We as a society though need to be extremely discriminating about what we agree constitutes the justification of lethal force.

Lest we degenerate into a society where lethal force is justified for spitting on the sidewalk.



Personally, I can't in good faith say that the officer was totally in the wrong here, I also cannot say that he was totally in the right.

There just isn't enough information available at this time to develop an informed opinion.

Hopefully, an honest investigation of the facts will be done by the proper authorities and the officer is either cleared of any wrongdoing or is punished for their actions. 

[Willow]

Running from the police is not the same as spitting on the ground.  Once the officer turns on his lights indicating the rider to pull over the pursuit is not because the rider was speeding but because he was fleeing the police.  At that point the LEO can only guess as to why the perpetrator ran.

I broke a lot of speed limits as a young man. I still do.  I was accused on occasion of running when an officer was well behind me and I was simply continuing to speed.  If my memory serves me at all I always pulled over when an officer got close enough for me to know it was me he was chasing.

I will not be so cold as to say the rider deserved to die but I will say that he died as a result of the bad and wrong choices he made.  

[3fan4life]

I'm 31 and am much more mature than everyone you speak of when they were my age. Or is it because I was taught at a young age to obey laws and do what the police ask you to do?

Trust me, You would be the exception to the rule.

I'm not questioning your level of maturity, but I will bet that in 20 years if you are honest with yourself you will realize that you weren't as mature as you thought you were.

[3fan4life]

Running from the police is not the same as spitting on the ground.  Once the officer turns on his lights indicating the rider to pull over the pursuit is not because the rider was speeding but because he was fleeing the police.  At that point the LEO can only guess as to why the perpetrator ran.

I'm not saying that it is the same. What I am saying is that if we as a society aren't careful about what we allow to justify the use of lethal force by the police. Our society may degenerate to the point where the use of lethal force is justified for multiple minor offenses. 

I broke a lot of speed limits as a young man. I still do.  I was accused on occasion of running when an officer was well behind me and I was simply continuing to speed.  If my memory serves me at all I always pulled over when an officer got close enough for me to know it was me he was chasing.

It sounds like we have a lot in common.

I will not be so cold as to say the rider deserved to die but I will say that he died as a result of the bad and wrong choices he made.

On this we can agree 100%.

[Gavin_Sons]

I'm 31 and am much more mature than everyone you speak of when they were my age. Or is it because I was taught at a young age to obey laws and do what the police ask you to do?

Trust me, You would be the exception to the rule.

I'm not questioning your level of maturity, but I will bet that in 20 years if you are honest with yourself you will realize that you weren't as mature as you thought you were.

Bet I will, I have 2 boys and a wife that need me. I dont have time for stupid shenanigans.

[old2soon]

We can speculate discuss dissect hash and rehash it all til we are blue in da face or what ever color suites ya and the end result will in no way shape or form or context change. The young man?-is dead no longer among us deceased expired gone from this life. Poor choices on the riders part? certainly. Bad or poor move on the L E Os part? at BEST a slim maybe. As Soon as the rider twisted the wick and IGNORED the warning-lights and siren ARE a WARNING-he signed Away for ALL Intents and purposes his "rights"! He may NOT have wanted to die BUT he did. Any negligence here as I see it and I M H O-is with or on the rider. He-the rider-had Ample time and ample warning to pull over. Never been a L E O but I've had ride alongs with them. I have driven Ambulance. I've seen human induced stupidity at it's very worst. The end result here in this chase we have a video of qualifies-human induced stupidity. Would that it WEREN'T so. RIDE SAFE.

[Gryphon Rider]

 SC penalty for failing to stop, according to lawyer Robert J. Reeves' web site:

If it is just the persons first offense, and there is no great bodily injury that occurred due to the violation, the person will be found guilty of a misdemeanor and must pay a fine of $500 or go to prison for no less than 3 months, and no more than 3 years. Moreover, the defendant’s license will be suspended for at least 30 days. Id.

However, if it is the second or subsequent offense, and no great bodily injury occurred, then the person will be guilty of a felony, and will be imprisoned for no more than 5 years. When they are released from prison, their license will be suspended for one year thereafter.

[Chrisj CMA]

SC penalty for failing to stop, according to lawyer Robert J. Reeves' web site:

If it is just the persons first offense, and there is no great bodily injury that occurred due to the violation, the person will be found guilty of a misdemeanor and must pay a fine of $500 or go to prison for no less than 3 months, and no more than 3 years. Moreover, the defendant’s license will be suspended for at least 30 days. Id.

However, if it is the second or subsequent offense, and no great bodily injury occurred, then the person will be guilty of a felony, and will be imprisoned for no more than 5 years. When they are released from prison, their license will be suspended for one year thereafter.

And your point is?

[Gavin_Sons]

SC penalty for failing to stop, according to lawyer Robert J. Reeves' web site:

If it is just the persons first offense, and there is no great bodily injury that occurred due to the violation, the person will be found guilty of a misdemeanor and must pay a fine of $500 or go to prison for no less than 3 months, and no more than 3 years. Moreover, the defendant’s license will be suspended for at least 30 days. Id.

However, if it is the second or subsequent offense, and no great bodily injury occurred, then the person will be guilty of a felony, and will be imprisoned for no more than 5 years. When they are released from prison, their license will be suspended for one year thereafter.

And your point is?

he would have been fined 500 bucks or 3 months in prison. But instead he died. Bad choice

[Chrisj CMA]

SC penalty for failing to stop, according to lawyer Robert J. Reeves' web site:

If it is just the persons first offense, and there is no great bodily injury that occurred due to the violation, the person will be found guilty of a misdemeanor and must pay a fine of $500 or go to prison for no less than 3 months, and no more than 3 years. Moreover, the defendant’s license will be suspended for at least 30 days. Id.

However, if it is the second or subsequent offense, and no great bodily injury occurred, then the person will be guilty of a felony, and will be imprisoned for no more than 5 years. When they are released from prison, their license will be suspended for one year thereafter.

And your point is?

he would have been fined 500 bucks or 3 months in prison. But instead he died. Bad choice

Exactly. The bad choice was his own. Had he stopped when he had the opportunity he would have been subject to the standard charges. His choice was to be an idiot and a danger. He suffered consequences of his own making. Yes, the cop could have let him get away because the chase became too dangerous but we know that's not what happened. How would he have felt if the rider went on to kill an innocent bystander or other motorists

[Jess from VA]

This case (facts) reminds me of a law school examination question.  The truth is, the facts are close enough to argue either way, pretty effectively.  This case is textbook good policing, right up to the end result.  Nobody likes the resulting death, and everybody agrees this guy was in the wrong. 

This case may go to a civil jury for wrongful death, unless the G decides to settle.  There will be a lot of arguing about fault and responsibility and procedure.   I hope the officer is not treated harshly, and given a clean bill of health to continue his career.  Being a good cop, dedicated to actively protecting and serving the public, and treating all perps in accordance with their rights too, is a tough, thankless and often risky job.  And we are damn lucky to have them. 

I will always tend to take the side of law and order (and to support the military and police in the field of duty) (and I did so above).  I will always tend to take the side against the socialists, tort lawyers, safety fanatics, free crap army, and professional claimants.

[G-Man]

At 60 mph, it becomes more than stopping a bike chase.

IF the officer had any common sense, and that's a big IF because I am seeing more and more officers that don't, he would have known that ramming, even tapping, a bike at 60 mph is the same as using deadly force. 

[Jess Tolbirt]

i have been stopped numerous times for speeding.. some of them i have gotten a ticket for..one time i went to jail for a couple nights...i am still alive

[Chrisj CMA]

i have been stopped numerous times for speeding.. some of them i have gotten a ticket for..one time i went to jail for a couple nights...i am still alive

i have been stopped

You are alive because you complied with law enforcement.  Had you run at 100mph and endangerd people, who knows?

[The emperor has no clothes]

i have been stopped numerous times for speeding.. some of them i have gotten a ticket for..one time i went to jail for a couple nights...i am still alive

You spent 2 nights in jail for speeding ? For not paying the fine ?

[Rams]

We all make decisions on a daily basis that could result in an outcome we did not expect, one that could result in our demise.    The rider made several bad decisions.    Justified?   No.   Predictable, Yes.

Playing stupid games to win stupid prizes is just plain stupid.

[Varmintmist]

Justified the instant he was going 105 in the opposite lanes. 

To further the firearm analogy, If a person is at the range and it has a 3 round limit, and he is shooting 6, then he is told to stop and leave. Is it a big deal? Nope, but it is breaking the rules.
Instead, he reloads and starts shooting into the lobby. Is it justified to stop him by any means possible?

The rider dropped to 30mph and the cop DID NOT hit him, then he took off back up to 100, so when he slowed down again the cop didnt drop off, he made a calculation and hit the rider. The riders previous actions caused the crash.

You could say if the person has a three round limit and he exceeds the limit he should be murdered after the 4th round because he exceeded the limit. Who knows who he might have injured after breaking the rules. Why take a chance. End it, the sooner the better.
 
If the cop needed to drop him, he had a perfect chance when he dropped to 26 mph. after chasing him at over 100 mph.One thing about it..."That SOB will never speed again in this town"

WRONG
When the guy was speeding, all he needed to do was pull over. When they guy was firing 6, all he needed to do was leave.  Thems the rules. When one goes out of his way to put people in danger, 100+ in the wrong direction, through lights, ect, or shooting into a lobby, it is a whole different ball game.

"But shooting into a lobby is more dangerous and irresponsible than running from the cops!!" How? You have no idea of my ability or mental state on a bike or with a revolver. Could I shoot into a lobby full of people and not hit anyone? You bet. Does that make it safe?

He didnt die because he was speeding, he died because he chose to put others at risk.