The Concept of Police Misconduct - Essay Example

After the truck failed to stop the officer was forced to pursue the passenger and activated the siren.  The pursued entered into other two officers and they were ordered to block the truck by closing the line it was driving. Tipsy did not stop but closed the line and collided with Oldsmobile. After the collision, Tipsy and the other two passengers in the Oldsmobile lost their lives. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a claim against the police officers, police chief and the police departments. In the case, the plaintiff claimed that the officers had violated or gone centrally to Section 1983 amendments. In the case, the plaintiff stated that the police did not observe the laws of pursuit in the conduct of high speeding.

In this case, in order to make the ruling, the court must consider some facts. The court must prove that the circumstances which led to the accident were a result of police action. The pursuit involved the death of three people and the court must determine whether the action of the police was the main cause of the death. In order for the officers to be held reliable for the death, the action by the officers must be the cause of the incident (Kappeler, 2006)v.

Before making the judgement, the court must examine different facts. The court must examine the cause of the pursuit. The court has the duty to examine why and when the pursuit took place. The court also must examine whether the police adhered to the pursuits laws. The police also must examine the cause of the accident and the events leading to the accident. In this case, the police officers were investigating a shoplifting crime. The officer started the pursuit in order to enforce the law by arresting a suspect. The police officer did not contact the pursuit for personal gains but was as a result of performing his duty. The court will determine whether the police officer acted for personal gain or for constitutional purposes. In this case, the police were enforcing the laws of the state. The court will also have the duty of determining whether the pursuit was contacted with respect to the Section 1983 amendments. The officer activated the siren in order to give a warning to other drivers that there was an emergency. Other drivers on the highway should have noticed the siren and taken precautions. The officer used the right procedure in carrying out a speed pursuit. The court will have to determine the ways in which the pursuit was contacted before ruling the case (Kappeler, 2006).

The events which took place in the case will also be analysed by the court in order to determine who was reliable or the cause of the accident. In this case, the two police officers blacked the truck which was used by Tipsy and Tipsy decided to change the line instead of stopping. At that time, when Tipsy was changing the line the officer’s siren was still on and the drivers at the other line should have taken precautions (Kappeler, 2006).

Plaintiff, in this case, had filed a claim for compensation. The plaintiff filed the claim against the officers who were in pursuit, the police department and the police chief. For officers to be held reliable for incidents occurring in pursuit, their actions must be the cause of the incident. In this case, there is no fact connecting the officers with the accident which took place. The plaintiff will not get any compensation in this case. The court will rule in favour of the police officers and the police department. The plaintiff filed the case against the officers but the officer’s action was not the result of the accident. The police were carrying out their duty and they had activated sirens. The police officer who was pursuing Tipsy had activated the siren in order to give a warning to other drivers on the road. Tipsy did not stop after being ordered by the officer. He did not even obey the traffic lights and was driving the careless. The police can not be held reliable for the pursuit because they were pursuing a suspected criminal. The pursuit could not have been there if Tipsy had stopped the first time. The main cause of the pursuit is Tipsy and he was the one reliable for the accidents which took place. The court will not hold the officers reliable so the plaintiff will not get any compensation. The plaintiff filed a claim against the wrong people and should have filed the claim against Tipsy who died in order to get compensation. The accident was also caused by Tipsy who was the main cause of the pursuit. The police action in the pursuit did not contribute to the accident and deaths caused. The court will analyse all those facts and dismiss the case (Kappeler, 2006).