CRM 103
Week 6
Discussion
How important was the videotape in the decision? Would the decision have been
the same without the videotape? How important was it that the officer received
permission for the maneuver from his supervisor? How important is this case to
police officers?
In this case, the video tape of the car chase played a significant role in the decision-making
process.
The Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment was not violated when a police
officer takes action to stop a fleeing motorist from putting innocent bystanders at risk.
The
videotape of the car chase indicated Harris’s extreme recklessness, which made it clear that no
reasonable juror could believe Harris’ version of the chase, which is the reason for the court
determining that the Fourth Amendment was not violated.
It is difficult to determine if the decision would have been the same without the videotapes.
However, the Court’s opinion indicated that the videotape was a critical piece of evidence that
assisted them with reaching a decision.
Regarding the importance of the officer receiving
permission for the maneuver from his supervisor, the Court did not explicitly address these issues
in its opinion.
However, the court noted that Officer Scott requested and received permission to
engage in a maneuver that would cause Harris’ car to spin to s atop, which indicated that the
Court viewed the actions of the officer as reasonable and justified under the circumstances.
This case is significant to police officers because it clarifies the circumstances under which
police officers can use force to stop a fleeing suspect.
The Court’s decision in this case provided
guidance to law enforcement officers on how to balance the need to apprehend a suspect with the
need to protect innocent bystanders (supreme,justia.com,n. d.).
Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007.
(n. d.).
Retrieved from
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/550/372
