Is this pursuit too dangerous?

[Paul Dishman]

https://twitter.com/cheshirepolice/status/12221916...

I thought they really pushed their luck going up the hard shoulder, then carrying a lot of speed through the roundabout without collecting anyone.

The final collision could have caused fatalities too. I know the pursued driver was completely reckless in turning into on-coming traffic, but I can't help but feel that was a panic decision forced on him by the pursuing police car. It would have been safer all round to have followed from a distance and used the helicopter to shadow and then stop the offender safely somewhere better.

Edited by Paul Dishman on Monday 3rd February 14:13

[carreauchompeur]

Nah, I can’t see anything too outlandish there. Relatively high speed but in a reasonably controlled environment, IE not hoofing through a town centre scattering pedestrians. If that contact hadn’t been successful they would probably have aborted at that point.

[Jakg]

Without any expertise I've seen similar manoeuvres in Suffolk & Cambridge in pursuits on their news feed - as soon as they try to go the wrong way up a dual carriageway they get rammed. Clearly some kind of pre-agreed reaction.

[Fatball]

Nothing wrong with what those officers did.

[Graveworm]

Paul Dishman said:

https://twitter.com/cheshirepolice/status/12221916...

I thought they really pushed their luck going up the hard shoulder, then carrying a lot of speed through the roundabout without collecting anyone.

The final collision could have caused more fatalities too. I know the pursued driver was completely reckless in turning into on-coming traffic, but I can't help but feel that was a panic decision forced on him by the pursuing police car. It would have been safer all round to have followed from a distance and used the helicopter to shadow and then stop the offender safely somewhere better.

What helicopter? Traffic light controlled roundabout, which had been green for some time, where there was a uniformed police officer, with their vehicle who knew they were coming.

Edited by Graveworm on Monday 3rd February 13:25

[Rowe]

Paul Dishman said:

could have caused more fatalities

how many fatalities were there?

[Greendubber]

Paul Dishman said:

https://twitter.com/cheshirepolice/status/12221916...

I thought they really pushed their luck going up the hard shoulder, then carrying a lot of speed through the roundabout without collecting anyone.

The final collision could have caused more fatalities too. I know the pursued driver was completely reckless in turning into on-coming traffic, but I can't help but feel that was a panic decision forced on him by the pursuing police car. It would have been safer all round to have followed from a distance and used the helicopter to shadow and then stop the offender safely somewhere better.

Brilliant.

But in answer to your question, the pursuit is fine.

[Graveworm]

Rowe said:

how many fatalities were there?

And what harm if they did not intervene.

[speedking31]

Idiots saying that it's a good job that the hard shoulder was there to enable the pursuit If there was no hard shoulder the target car wouldn't have been able to go at those speeds in the first place.

[jonwm]

I went past the aftermath of this pursuit, the police BMW was clearly a total loss, all airbags deployed and a side & rear window smashed (maybe from the airbag deployment?).
I've seen a few of these from west mids lately, seems any indication of going up the wrong carriageway they get a shove, fairplay to the officer as they always seem to face the wrath of IOPC if things go wrong.

[anonymous-user]

Nice job by the police there!

[mcdjl]

jonwm said:

I went past the aftermath of this pursuit, the police BMW was clearly a total loss, all airbags deployed and a side & rear window smashed (maybe from the airbag deployment?).
I've seen a few of these from west mids lately, seems any indication of going up the wrong carriageway they get a shove, fairplay to the officer as they always seem to face the wrath of IOPC if things go wrong.

Was the car they hit just as badly messed up? If not bad call by the cops as they couldn't have continued the chase.

Paul Dishman said:

https://twitter.com/cheshirepolice/status/12221916...

I thought they really pushed their luck going up the hard shoulder, then carrying a lot of speed through the roundabout without collecting anyone.

The final collision could have caused more fatalities too. I know the pursued driver was completely reckless in turning into on-coming traffic, but I can't help but feel that was a panic decision forced on him by the pursuing police car. It would have been safer all round to have followed from a distance and used the helicopter to shadow and then stop the offender safely somewhere better.

How did the cops force the driver into the decision of 'stop as requested, drive away on correct side of road, or do a handbrake turn into on coming traffic'?
It would have been safer all round if they hadn't tried to escape from the cops.

[carinaman]

The sentence will be laughably light, but I am not sure how you weigh up the risks from that driving versus someone walking around London in a pretend suicide vest stabbing random strangers.

[N7GTX]

garyhun said:

Nice job by the police there!

^^^^^^^^ Absolutely this

[Paul Dishman]

Rowe said:

how many fatalities were there?

None, my mistake. Now corrected.

[Paul Dishman]

mcdjl said:

How did the cops force the driver into the decision of 'stop as requested, drive away on correct side of road, or do a handbrake turn into on coming traffic'?
It would have been safer all round if they hadn't tried to escape from the cops.

Obviously it would have been, but people panic and act stupidly. All split second decisions that could have ended in tragedy, but didn't this time.

The consensus here seems to be that the managed risk taking by the police was acceptable. I'm not so sure.

[Elliot2000]

Paul Dishman said:

Obviously it would have been, but people panic and act stupidly. All split second decisions that could have ended in tragedy, but didn't this time.

The consensus here seems to be that the managed risk taking by the police was acceptable. I'm not so sure.

The choice was made by the fleeing driver - he could have stopped- responsibility lies with him and only him.

The reason criminality by moped gangs in cities became so prominent a few years ago was precisely because police decided the risk of chasing the mopeds was too high, I haven’t got actual statistics of what the situation is like since they have reintroduced chasing and ramming mopeds, but I suspect it’s reduced overall moped crime and I don’t see it on the news as mich now

[Paul Dishman]

Elliot2000 said:

The choice was made by the fleeing driver - he could have stopped- responsibility lies with him and only him.

The reason criminality by moped gangs in cities became so prominent a few years ago was precisely because police decided the risk of chasing the mopeds was too high, I haven’t got actual statistics of what the situation is like since they have reintroduced chasing and ramming mopeds, but I suspect it’s reduced overall moped crime and I don’t see it on the news as mich now

Indeed. However the consequences of a motorway pile-up could be greater than knocking the a chav of a moped.

[Derek Smith]

Paul Dishman said:

Obviously it would have been, but people panic and act stupidly. All split second decisions that could have ended in tragedy, but didn't this time.

The consensus here seems to be that the managed risk taking by the police was acceptable. I'm not so sure.

It is just that; a matter of opinion.

When presented with the offender driving in the wrong direction, the officer had a split second to make up his Mind. Leave a reckless driver to go his own way on a 70mph bit of dual carriageway or try and remove a lot of the danger. One would assume that the police driver could see what was coming.

The decision was between allowing high danger and lowering the danger. A car driving the wrong way on any 70mph bit of road is likely to cause a fatal/serious injury to a road user, and that includes the offender and anyone else in the car. The choice was correct, and not only because of the result.

The difference between your opinion of what was appropriate and that of the police driver is that they have to support theirs, and sometimes in a court, standing in the dock. Certainly, the quality of their driving and risk limitation up until that point was faultless. If you were prosecuting the officer, you would have to come up with a reason why he or she suddenly decided to drive recklessly.

If the police driver had decided to ram the offender on the slip road, rather than wait for a clear cut example of reckless driving, I would have supported them 100%. I wonder if discipline and complaints would have.

[otolith]

Ramming him at that point could have led to a serious accident. Allowing him to drive at high speed against the traffic almost certainly would have. Correct call, I think. Shame he'll be out in a year.