Vident Partners provides vetted police pursuit expert witnesses for cases involving decisions to start or end a chase, written pursuit policies, supervisor control, tire deflation and PIT maneuvers, bystander and passenger injuries, and federal and state liability standards nationwide. Request a referral today.
Find a Police Pursuits Expert →Overview
A police pursuit expert asks one question at each point in a chase: did the risk of continuing outweigh the need to catch this person right now? The answer changes minute by minute, as speed, traffic, weather and what the officer knows all change. This page covers vehicle pursuits. Force used at the end of a stop belongs to a use of force expert, and the physics of the crash belongs to an accident reconstructionist.
The numbers explain the attention. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported an estimated 68,000 vehicle pursuits in 2012, and that from 1996 to 2015 an average of 355 persons were killed annually in pursuit-related crashes 1. Nearly two-thirds of those deaths were occupants of the pursued vehicle. A third were occupants of a vehicle not involved in the pursuit or bystanders not in a vehicle, and occupants of the police vehicle made up slightly more than 1% 1. About two-thirds of pursuits began with a traffic violation, such as speeding, reckless driving or suspected drunk driving 1. That last figure often frames the case: was this offense worth this risk?
Almost every agency has a written rule. BJS reported that, as of January 2013, all state police and highway patrol agencies and nearly all local police departments had a written pursuit policy 1. Agencies vary. Some leave the decision to officer discretion and others restrict it. BJS found the highest pursuit rate among agencies that left the decision to the officer, at 17 pursuits per 100 officers employed 1.
The expert reads the policy against the radio traffic, dash camera, body camera, computer logs and training records, and asks:
Federal claims face steep hurdles. In County of Sacramento v. Lewis, a passenger was killed when a motorcycle he was on went down and a pursuing car struck him. The Supreme Court held that an officer does not violate substantive due process by causing death through deliberate or reckless indifference to life in a high-speed chase aimed at apprehending a suspected offender 2. Chases with no intent to harm suspects physically or to worsen their legal plight do not give rise to substantive due process liability 2.
The suspect's own claim runs under the Fourth Amendment, where a seizure is required. Brower v. County of Inyo says a seizure occurs when governmental termination of a person's movement is effected through means intentionally applied 3. In Scott v. Harris, the Court held that because the chase posed a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others, an officer's attempt to end it by forcing the car off the road was reasonable 4. Plumhoff v. Rickard held that officers' conduct did not violate the Fourth Amendment in a chase that ended in gunfire 5. Mullenix v. Luna addressed only the qualified immunity question for a trooper who fired on a fleeing car 6. Together, those decisions make a federal claim hard, especially for a fleeing driver.
A departure from policy is not itself a constitutional violation. A plaintiff's expert should recognize that, and tie the opinion to the standard that does apply. Video is often decisive: in Scott, the Court relied on what the tape showed 4.
Injured bystanders usually proceed in state court, where the law varies widely. Statutes may set a due care or reckless disregard standard for emergency drivers, and many states have immunity rules or damage caps. Those rules decide whether negligence is enough. The FTCA, for federal officers, excludes claims based on a discretionary function 7. Counsel should identify the standard first, because it decides whether a policy violation is close to the heart of the case or merely background.
No license applies. Look for a former patrol commander, pursuit trainer, or emergency vehicle operations instructor with experience writing policy and reviewing pursuits. Ask how the expert applied the agency's own policy and how the opinion would differ for a violent felony versus a traffic stop. A reconstructionist addresses speed and impact. A human factors expert may address perception and reaction. A municipal risk expert may address training and supervision.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that from 1996 to 2015 an average of 355 persons were killed annually in pursuit-related crashes, and that about two-thirds of pursuits began with a traffic violation.
Case Types
Bystander injuries and deaths during pursuits
Passenger claims from a pursued vehicle
PIT maneuvers and forced stops
Roadblocks and tire deflation devices
Failure to terminate a chase for a minor offense
Supervisor failure to control a pursuit
Inadequate pursuit policy and training
Emergency vehicle operation crashes without a pursuit
Qualifications
Related Specialties
FAQ
Look for a former patrol commander, supervisor, or emergency vehicle operations instructor who has written policy and reviewed pursuits. The expert should apply the agency's own policy and the state's law. Experience on both sides of these cases is a useful sign of balance.
Usually under state law, and it varies widely. Statutes may set a due care or reckless disregard standard, and immunity rules or damage caps may apply. Federal substantive due process claims face County of Sacramento v. Lewis, which rejected liability for reckless indifference in a chase without intent to harm.
It depends on the facts. In Scott v. Harris, the Supreme Court held that forcing a car off the road was reasonable because the chase posed a substantial and immediate risk of serious physical injury to others. An expert addresses speed, traffic, and policy, and video often decides the question.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported an average of 355 persons killed annually in pursuit-related crashes from 1996 to 2015. Nearly two-thirds were occupants of the pursued vehicle, and about a third were people in other vehicles or bystanders. These figures are from a May 2017 report, so check for later data.
Not by itself under the Constitution. A policy violation may matter more in state negligence claims, or as evidence of training and supervision. Counsel should identify the governing standard first, then ask the expert to connect the policy to it.
In general, police pursuit expert fees are determined by the expert themselves, based on a variety of criteria. Among those criteria are command experience, forensic experience, instructor credentials, the volume of video and records, and publications. Vident does have some influence over expert fees by comparing experts within a specialty, but ultimately it is a personal decision by the expert.
Related Insights
Federal and state prosecutors both treat fentanyl sales as a top priority, but they do so in different ways and for different types of cases. Understanding those differences helps explain why some def...
Case AnalysisFifteen-year-old Nathan Bruno, a student at Portsmouth (Rhode Island) High School, committed suicide on February 7, 2018. The Portsmouth School Committee commissioned an independent investigation by...
Case AnalysisIn Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R., 162 N.E. 99 (N.Y. 1928), which we all remember from our first-year torts class, Judge Benjamin Cardozo restated, in his uniquely pithy manner, the common law rule...
Sources
Vident Partners connects attorneys with qualified police pursuits expert witnesses. Complimentary consultation, 24-hour turnaround, no obligation.
Request an Expert →