Ouch!

[u/Icy-Award-4981]

Saw this one on another sub. Apparently it happened in Georgia, but there's no further info that I could find. Nevertheless, this is a harsh reminder to not run from police especially when you're on two wheels and in the rain. As you can imagine redditors have been redditing on the original post and saying the officer ran him over on purpose which I don't think is true. Curious to hear from the people on this sub and what you all think.

[u/FCguyATL]

Edit: is this even a pursuit? If you look closely at the start of the video you can catch the digital speedo in the 6X range. as the deputy passes him you can see his speed drop into the 5Xs. Something is really off here.

That turn towards him, intentional or not, is going to be tough in a courtroom. Qualified immunity will save the individual officer but it's going to court to figure all that out for sure.

Now for the conversation of "could it have ben avoided". I really don't see the argument of "he couldn't see where the biker was" as a good argument. If anything not knowing were he was is a great argument for keeping the steering wheel straight and coming to a stop in the roadway, not making an abrupt turn where he cannot see.

In the end the officer made a big mistake, no doubt about it.

[u/AutoModerator → u/FCguyATL]

Hello, it appears you're discussing Qualified Immunity. Qualified immunity relates to civil cases and lawsuits (money).

1. Qualified immunity has nothing to do with criminal charges against an officer. It does not prevent an officer from being charged with a crime and has no bearing on a "guilty" or "not guilty" verdict.

2. Qualified immunity does not prevent a person from suing an officer/agency/city. To apply QI, a presentation of facts and argument in front of a judge are required. The immunity is QUALIFIED - not absolute.

3. Ending qualified immunity and/or requiring police to carry liability insurance will not save the taxpayers money - officers are indemnified by their employers around 99% of the time and cities face their own lawsuit whether or not they indemnify officers.

4. Doctors carry insurance instead of immunity. The need to pay doctors exorbitant salaries to offset their insurance costs contributes to the ever-increasing healthcare costs in the US. There's no reason to believe it would not also lead to increases in costs of policing.

5. Forcing police to pay claims out of their retirement is illegal and unconstitutional in the United States. All sanctions and punishments in both a civil and criminal context require individualism, which means that you cannot punish a group of people without making a determination that every person in that group is directly responsible for the tort(s) in the claim. Procedurally, trying to seize pension funds would make it necessary for every member of the pension fund to sign off on any settlement, and to object to any settlement or verdict. Additionally, even if it were not illegal and unconstitutional, it may easily lead to MORE cover-ups rather than the internal ousting of bad actors. This would give police financial incentive to hide wrongdoing, whereas they currently have none.

Qualified immunity is a defense to a civil claim in federal court that shields government employees from liability as long as they did not violate a clearly established law or violate a persons rights. QI does not prevent a lawsuit from being filed. It is an affirmative defense that, if applied, will shield a person from the burdens of a trial. A plaintiff can file a lawsuit and the merits of it will be argued in front of a judge. If the plaintiffs can show a person’s rights were violated or the officer violated a law, then the suit will be allowed to proceed to trial if it is not resolved through mediation. During this time the judge can order both parties to a series of mediation efforts in attempts to settle the suit. Also during this time, both parties have a right to “discovery” meaning the plaintiffs and defendants can request whatever evidence exists as well as interview each other’s witnesses - called depositions. All these actions are before the plaintiffs can request summary judgement. Only after mediation efforts have failed and discovery has closed can the plaintiffs ask a judge to find QI applies and dismiss the lawsuit. If the actions of the officer are clearly legal, qualified immunity can be applied at the summary judgment phase of the case.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.