XPost: alt.thebird.copwatch, alt.law-enforcement, alt.true-crime   
   XPost: alt.california, nyc.general   
   From: nospam@me.com   
      
   "Ted Kerin"  wrote in message   
   news:bqql04016s9@enews2.newsguy.com...   
   >   
   > "jaybird"  wrote in message   
   > news:7K3Ab.93153$do1.29881@twister.austin.rr.com...   
   > >   
   > >   
   > > The legal limits of the law are very existent.  We're not talking about   
   > the   
   > > movies where the cops just slam on the gas and take off.  A cop is   
   > > responsible for issues that occur because of negligent or reckless   
   > behavior   
   > > on his part.   
   > >   
   >   
   >   
   > Sorry, I don't know of a jurisdiction where "negiligent" is the standard   
   for   
   > police liability in these situations, or even "reckless". Your underlying   
   > point is acknowledged (that standards exist), but I can't agree with your   
   > specifics. The burden of proof is way beyond that, to a point where,   
   > anyplace I've researched it, liability is non-existent as a practical   
   > matter. And there are places where the immunity for police in high-speed   
   > pursuit is absolute. Maybe you're thinking of some older cases, before the   
   > higher courts got hold of the issue.   
      
   No, I'm thinking of current standards.  Try researching more into traffic   
   codes, or penal codes for your specific state.  Most have a clause which   
   states the operator of an emergency vehicle is required by law to exercise   
   due care when operating in emergency conditions.   
      
   --   
   ---   
   jaybird   
   ---   
   I am not the cause of your problems.   
   My actions are the result of your actions.   
   Your life is not my fault.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)