Judge Orders Beaumont To Pay Up

[Conveyor Belt]

This is perhaps one of the most assinine rulings I've seen in the state of MS in a while. From the article (http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060708/NEWS01/607080314/1002), the police noticed a guy driving erraticly, so they attempted to pull him over, and he fled in the car. They gave chase and the guy crashes the car and kills himself, the woman in the car and the 10 year old daughter of the two.

Grandmother decided it's the police's fault they're dead and sues the city. The judge awards the grandmother $227,500 for the death of the girl, since she was the only innocent victim in the car (the guy was drunk and the woman knew he was drunk).

I sympathize to a point with the loss to the grandmother of her granddaugher, daughter and son-in-law. However, it is NOT the police or city's fault they are dead. He made a decision to flee from the officer and the family is left with the concequences. HE (the son-in-law) is the reason they are dead, not the police.

[Tully Mars]

The ruling itself does not surprise me much. What does surprise me is that it came from Judge Helfrich. I have always viewed him as more conservative than the judgement appears to be. Perhaps there is someone here who can shed a bit more light on the reasoning behind this ruling. :smt102

[Conveyor Belt]

Maybe there was contact between the police car and the driver's car that caused the accident. In that instance, I could give a millimeter in a lightyear more consideration toward the ruling.

[aaron]

I don't really understand how money makes it better. I don't see where the grandmother has to take care of the child now, or has a lot of medical expenses.

[Booshay]

If the police were close enough to get the tag number, there was no need to continue chasing him. Get the tag number, description of the driver, run the tag, go wait at his house and arrest him when he pulls up.

[aaron]

The incident that led to the accident started when Pipkins attempted to stop McDonald's vehicle in Beaumont because of erratic driving and an obscured license plate.


There's your answer. It may be harsh, but I can't believe the mother of a guy like this is getting $227,000. His failures as a parent is being rewarded to his parents.

[Joelaw]

If the police were close enough to get the tag number, there was no need to continue chasing him. Get the tag number, description of the driver, run the tag, go wait at his house and arrest him when he pulls up.


Not to pick on you Booshay but I have a real problem with this train of thought. You never know why a car is running it could be because the driver’s license is suspended and they don’t want to get a ticket or something small like that, or it could be that dead body in the trunk. The officer never knows until he/she gets that vehicle stopped.

If I have 20 pounds of pot in the car with me and I knew the police could not chase me if they tried to stop me do you think I would stop? Hell no. I’m gonna run because I know that the police can’t chase me. I’ll go drop off the shipment / hide the body etc. then go home and take my little misdemeanor charge, pay my little fine and walk out a free man.

Now how do we fix this? I’m Glad you asked. We need to change the law. Change running from the police ( in a vehicle ) from a misdemeanor into a felony. Start giving people two or three years in prison and the number people who are running because their license is suspended will drop like a stone. This way if someone does run, the officer will have a very good idea that it’s because the suspect has committed a felony. When a driver decides to flee the police in a vehicle that driver is putting many lives in danger. Why do we still put up with this? Why do we still blame the officer?
It’s time to change the law.

[SouthChic]

Now how do we fix this? I’m Glad you asked. We need to change the law. Change running from the police ( in a vehicle ) from a misdemeanor into a felony. Start giving people two or three years in prison and the number people who are running because their license is suspended will drop like a stone. This way if someone does run, the officer will have a very good idea that it’s because the suspect has committed a felony. When a driver decides to flee the police in a vehicle that driver is putting many lives in danger. Why do we still put up with this? Why do we still blame the officer?
It’s time to change the law.

Joelaw, the law has been changed to make running from the police a felony. It's called Eluding Law Enforcement.

[Joelaw]

Joelaw, the law has been changed to make running from the police a felony. It's called Eluding Law Enforcement.

wow when did they change it ( and how did I miss it lol )

[SouthChic]

wow when did they change it ( and how did I miss it lol )

It was changed within the last year or so. It falls under Statute 97-9-72. See if this link (http://198.187.128.12/mississippi/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=fs-main.htm) works.

[Joelaw]

I still don’t see how it’s the officer’s fault just because he was trying to do his job.

[Conveyor Belt]

Taking the tag number doesn't work too well when the car was just stolen and the owner isn't aware, or the criminal killed the owner and took the car, or the criminal is borrowing the car, etc. Also, do you have any idea how many people don't have their current address on file??? I'd venture to say it's probably a good deal of people.

There was a pretty cool idea in popular science where the police car has these little gps trakers that shoot out of the hood of the police car and stick to the vehicle eluding. Then, the officers can back off and follow the car with gps.

[SouthChic]

I agree it wasn't the officer's fault the people died. The man decided to flee, and because of his poor choice he killed himself and his family.

However, had the officer not chased them (because there was a child in the vehicle), they probably wouldn't be dead either.

In a hostage situation involving a child, the officers would never try to shoot the perp because of the possibility of injuring or killing the child. I would think the same thing would fall into play in this instance. Since there was a child in the vehicle, the officer should have never pursued. Did the officer know there was a child in the car? I don't know, but surely that fact came out in court. :smt102

[Conveyor Belt]

If they would never have chased the car, and the man would have crashed the car and everyone died, could they have sued the police for NOT stopping the car and preventing the accident when the police knew he was endangering the life of a child?

[SouthChic]

If they would never have chased the car, and the man would have crashed the car and everyone died, could they have sued the police for NOT stopping the car and preventing the accident when the police knew he was endangering the life of a child?

I don't think so. If the officer hadn't chased the man, an accident wasn't likely.

I think it would depend on their police department's pursuit policy though.

[Tully Mars]

The article states that the pursuit began because the person was "driving erratically the tag was obscured". From that information, a pursuit was necessary first and foremost because the guy was likely drunk and there was probably good odds that he could have caused a wreck and injured or killed someone. Also, with the tag "obscured", getting the tag number and going to his home to wait on him was probably not an option.

Of course we do not have all of the facts that came out in the trial but it sounds to me as if the officer was doing his sworn duty to "protect and serve".

[Bahlk]

Also, was this officer told by a supervisor to cancel the pursuit or not. If he was and he didn't then I can see where they will be liable but if he is not told to (and depending on current department policies) he would be just doing his job

[SouthChic]

I'd still like to know their department's pursuit policy. It could state not to pursue vehicles that are fleeing.

[aaron]

Well, now Perry County tax payers will have to pay for this guy's mistakes. Not the officer, not the judge, just the taxpayer. Of course, the taxpayer doesn't care, they don't have time, they have to get to work to pay their taxes.

[Booshay]

Joelaw, I dont feel like Im being picked on so its all good...I never meant to imply that the accident was the officers fault...I dont feel it was....just meant that there MAY have been other options (roadblocks, stopsticks, backing off a little not to scare the guy even more, etc etc)...CB has a good point too...if the car was stolen, the guy wouldnt stop and going to the rightful owners house wouldnt have done any good. Im sure the officer did what he thought was right and had the publics best interest in mind. Yeah, I too, think it sucks that the taxpayers have to pay up because this idiot ran from the police. Sorry for the confusion.

[daisy]

Wow, I never saw so many views until I read this. A tragedy for the child and grandmother and I can see how the grandmother sued. It's hard to think when you've lost a child and grandchild.

I hope I got that right.

[Conveyor Belt]

I don't think so. If the officer hadn't chased the man, an accident wasn't likely.


The only reason I said he may have crashed was because he was drinking and driving. Sure, people do it every day and nothing comes of it, but, still, what if this time was his time to screw up? If nothing, it surely increases his chances.

[IGID]

And there lies the problem. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't. If the Officer would have seen the child in the car and realized the idiot driver probably wasn't going to stop and let him go and later that night they wrecked and killed everybody, these same people would be complaining about the Officer letting him go when he knew he was impaired. Hindsight is always 20/20. I don't think the grandmother should be rewarded for he sons stupid mistake. I'm sure an appeal is in the works.

[pharmcop]

Granny is just taking advantage of the situation. Don't pass judgement until you've walked a mile in the officer's shoes. No one knows what was going on the the time the chase was initiated except the officer. He was sworn to serve and uphold the law and I'm sure that is exactly what he was doing at the time. If the drunk had been let go and had killed someone else, it may have been someone else's child or daughter or son-in-law. Would that have made it more fair to the drunk driver? Until you've been on the side of the law, you can't understand.

[Joelaw]

If they would never have chased the car, and the man would have crashed the car and everyone died, could they have sued the police for NOT stopping the car and preventing the accident when the police knew he was endangering the life of a child?


Yes.

[MSQueen]

Lula Wilson of Petal sued the town and then-Beaumont Police Officer William Pipkins for $500,000 after she lost her daughter, Jo Ann McDonald, 36; son-in-law, Charles McDonald, 36; and granddaughter, Lula Bates, 10, in the chase. The accident occurred Dec. 19, 2003.

"The judgment is only in favor of the wrongful death beneficiaries of the child," said Wilson's attorney, Ray Price. "He ruled against the guy because he was engaged in unlawful activity - drinking and driving. He ruled against the woman because she assumed the risk because she knew he was drinking and driving."

JUST TO CLARIFY ---- according to the article, the driver was Ms. Wilson's SON-IN-LAW, the wife was her DAUGHTER, and the child was her GRANDDAUGHTER! the driver WAS NOT Ms. Wilson's son.

also, ONLY the wrongful death beneficiaries of the CHILD were awarded the judgment. should the child have any brothers or sisters, they would also be entitled to a portion of the judgment.

i know that doesn't change the issue regarding whether ANYBODY should have gotten a judgment, but it is simply to clarify WHO sued and WHO would receive benefit of the judgment.

[IGID]

It's still not Beaumonts or the Officers fault.

[Joelaw]

I think the officer was named in the suit as an individual and has to pay from his own pocked along with the city. ( I think the story that said that was on WDAM )

[ACEsmom]

I hope not!!! He was just doing his job! OMG - I hope someone - or some organization steps up to help him out. Ok - Wynn can get pretty stupid, but we expect that, but this is unbelievable.

[wilebill]

I've heard that all the facts in the case haven't been presented here. You just have to remember that Judge Helfrich, IMO, has been pretty fair in his rulings so far, so he probably ruled the same way in this case.