The video link is in OP (
YouTube ) . Even after he got to grandma's he refused to get out of the car for several minutes and then hoped out with an attitude. Either way, fleeing the police in a vehicle makes it a felony under Texas law and if you watch the video, he had plenty of places to pull over before he got to grandma's house.
All can say to this is, after viewing the video, is that this is one way to handle this set of circumstances. It is not how I was trained to do it, and not how I trained others. Many departments have many different ways to deal with situations like this one. I prefer the way my department does it but I am not going to cast dispersions on other departments for how they do it.
This is how it would have gone down in my jurisdiction:
The video begins at approx. 1339 hours local time. The suspect is being followed at what appears to be normal speeds within a residential community. Locations would have been called in, the radio channel would have been cleared of other voice traffic, and a supervisor assigned to the pursuit to monitor it and break it off if it seemed to becoming dangerous to the community. As it was rolling at traffic normal speeds it would have likely remained engaged the two minute length we are privy to on the recording and ended, as this one did, in the grandmother's driveway.
He was stopped in his grandmother's driveway at 1341 hours so that is two minutes of slow speed pursuit we are watching.
The pursuing officer would have relayed the location of the stop immediately and a backup that would already have been in route would be advised.
Upon arrival the engaging officer would have waited for the backup to assume a cover position at gun ready, NOT drawn but holstered and hands on, and then the engaging officer would have taken a cover position behind his open door, getting better view inside the vehicle and allowing the suspect to see him as people respond better to the uniform and seeing the officer than to commands given to them from a squad car.
IN the case of a pursuit, when he finally came out we would have ordered him to the ground and approached him once he was away from the vehicle and can't get at anything inside of it. So his placing himself on the ground would have been fine by me. We have a lot of gang activity where I use to work so we would cuff people for THEIR protection as well as ours in a situation where eluding had taken place. We also aren't waiting around for people outside the circumstances to inject themselves into the situation, allow it to devolve into a crowd scene and other people becoming suspects themselves by interfering with an officer in the performance of their duty.
The second that crowd started to interact with the officers that one man unit would have been on its way into the Pct with the cuffed suspect patted down in the holding rear section and an escort unit following it in. A determination would have been quickly made as to whether that car the suspect was driving needed to be impounded. If so a unit would be left to meet the dispatched tow truck. At the Pct the determination would be made to summons and release, or process for detainment for further charges added to the traffic offenses.
No fallen old lady. No dealing with the belligerent neighbors coming out to insert themselves into the scenario and possibly requiring arrest themselves.
A quick de-escalation of the situation by removal of the suspect from the area by going to him, taking control, and leaving the scene.
Again, that is how we did it. That DOES NOT mean how they did it was wrong. Different departments work in different ways, and have different systems.
We operated in the NYPD, "New Centurion", model. Other departments use the LAPD, Philadelphia PD, "Law Enforcement" model. I vasty prefer the New Centurion methodology, but that is me.
These are terms most of you never heard before. You weren't suppose to. You didn't do this for a living. I am not attempting to be callus when I state I wouldn't try to tell you good folks how to do what you do to earn a living if I had absolutely no knowledge of it.
That you have feelings and opinions is fair, and I am not suggesting you shouldn't. I am suggesting that you accept the fact, as it is a fact, that lack of direct knowledge of something does mean one is not qualified to make a job performance review.
If one has issues then one addresses them with their vote, the hierarchy of the department or their civilian review board, and in a manner complying with the law. If one feels unqualified to do so one hires legal counsel to act for them. Not by engaging in rioting, destruction of property, or other criminal activity that makes matters worse, not better.
eace
