gringo
No I guess I can't. As you explained the incident, there was no chase. The car was stopped, or almost stopped at the intersection. The kid saw the cop car with the lights flashing and took off. The uncle who was driving the car didn't bother looking enough to see that there was an emergency vehicle with flashing lights.
It wasn't a chase if the kid just realized that the cops were on his tail and took off.
That would be a valid argument if there had been an ongoing chase, but from the way you described it that seems not to be the case.
I would suggest that your blaming the cop in this case is more indicative of your anti cop bias than my pro cop bias.
Your analogy would be more like a wanted felon in a crowd sees a cop and then pulls out his gun, starts shooting and kills someone.
No doubt. Some people get that way when they have been caught committed in a crime.
Maybe you should try that hose trick on yourself and admit that there was no mention of excessive force at the kid's trial.
Actually, you suggested that maybe he was : " and he was said to be damned quick to use his baton during routine traffic stops--maybe the kid was afraid to stop for this particular cop, or maybe all that is irrelevant."
Oh? It was the kid who suddenly took off. It was the kid in the stolen car who, fearing he was about to get caught that decided to hit the gas instead of the brake. And it was the uncle who pulled ahead without having looked enough to see that the stolen car was not going to stop. There were three drivers and three vehicles. Two of them collided. Neither of those was the cop. The cop was the least of the hazards that day.
Your story keeps getting better all the time. Keep working on it. At the rate it is evolving we will soon have the cop forcing the kid to get into the car as he frames him for the theft.
