SA Police vs. Sheriff chase policy

[TexasRedneck]

Originally Posted by Shock

I found it unnecessary for McManus to go on tv and call out another agency the way he did. Just call up Mr. Salazar next time and have a discussion.

He needs his camera time.

[TexasRedneck]

Originally Posted by Azure110

It is not when *I* want a chase called off. You keep twisting this around and around.

it is about establishing department guidelines for how chase is conducted. The police should never be given "Just do what it takes to stop them" kind of freedom because innocent people may also get hurt or die in the process.

And, of course, the criminal fleeing the scene isn't a danger to anyone, right? The SO has pursuit guidelines in place, and they were followed. The injury happened AFTER the chase, while they were doing the follow-up investigation. Yet I don't see you calling for those policies to be reviewed/revised. Wouldn't that make more sense?

[MenardMQ]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

And, of course, the criminal fleeing the scene isn't a danger to anyone, right? The SO has pursuit guidelines in place, and they were followed. The injury happened AFTER the chase, while they were doing the follow-up investigation. Yet I don't see you calling for those policies to be reviewed/revised. Wouldn't that make more sense?

Uh, no

Now I realize you'd prefer that BCSO and SAPD pull their guns and start shooting at tires during the hint of a chase, like DPS, but we live in a major metro area with a lot of traffic and people.

The simple reality is that a chase policy like SAPDs carefully weighs the pros and cons of a pursuit, and has determined through empirical evidence that chasing someone for a traffic violation or non-felony crime where a firearm isn't used is dangerous and an unnecessary use of resources. Get the tag number, call in Eagle or DPS-107 (the helicopter) and just let them go. Detectives can follow up later or the helo can track and bring in units when the suspects have gotten to a safer point (parked, left the vehicle on foot etc)

And while BCSO has a "different" pursuit policy, I can assure you that the vast majority of the time, when a pursuit starts their supervisors are screaming over the radio to terminate the pursuit if the situation is anything less than an armed suspect who just committed an aggravated felony. Because BCSO frankly has far less training, and far more "hotshots" and "hotheads" out on patrol, and those supervisors have been burned before. It's just a simple reality.

The difference in this pursuit on IH-35 was a COPS crew was involved, and supervisors didn't so much as raise a peep about the pursuit because they knew compelling cool TV film was being shot, even though it was an extremely dangerous one (wrong way driving on IH-35).

I pulled the radio traffic from all the agencies involved. I can assure you that Chief McMannis has every right to be pissed and his comments were spot on. BCSO continued that pursuit when it should have been terminated long ago on Austin Hwy before the suspects decided to get crazy and drive the wrong way up IH-35. And that officer would NOT have been struck directing traffic if there wasn't an accident caused by that pursuit on the freeway. Plain and simple.

[Azure110]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

And, of course, the criminal fleeing the scene isn't a danger to anyone, right? The SO has pursuit guidelines in place, and they were followed. The injury happened AFTER the chase, while they were doing the follow-up investigation. Yet I don't see you calling for those policies to be reviewed/revised. Wouldn't that make more sense?

The point is that this chase was handled poorly by some "hotheads" wanting their 15 mins of fame on TV as the other poster put it.