Quantcast

Police training videos at issue in lawsuit over motorcyclist’s crash

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Police training videos at issue in lawsuit over motorcyclist’s crash

State Court
Sandiegocourthouse

San Diego Courthouse | San Diego Courts

SAN DIEGO (Legal Newsline) - Family members of a motorcyclist who crashed after leading police on a 100 m.p.h. chase might win money from the City of San Diego because police officers didn’t spend a required hour a year watching videos on how to conduct vehicular pursuits.

A California appeals court reversed a lower-court decision letting San Diego off the hook, saying the city failed to provide evidence proving it complied with a state law mandating annual training. Under that law, police departments are immune from liability for vehicle crashes only if they comply with a detailed list of requirements including a written policy for pursuits and a minimum of one hour a year in training.

Patricia Flores and Angelica Sanchez sued San Diego after William Flores lost control of his cycle fleeing police and died in March 2017. An officer had started pursuit of a speeding motorcycle, then lost contact, when another officer noticed a bike speeding on the highway with a female passenger on the back. The officer resumed the chase until Flores swerved into a parking lot and plowed into a retaining wall. He was killed and the passenger was thrown free.

San Diego moved for dismissal, citing California Vehicle Code section 17004.7, which shields police from liability if they adopt written policies and training procedures for vehicular pursuits. San Diego police had a 25-minute training video, but there was no technology for proving officers watched the entire thing.  San Diego said a survey of more than 1,800 police training files found that 89% of officers had complied with the training policy, however.

The trial court dismissed the case and the plaintiffs appealed. California’s Fourth Appellate District, Division One, reversed in a Sept. 15 decision, ruling the city failed to meet its burden for dismissal.

On appeal, the plaintiffs argued the city failed to meet two key requirements of the law, to promulgate a policy and make sure officers are adequately trained under it. The city argued the training requirement is only an hour and can be satisfied at the police academy. The appeals court called this “clearly incorrect,” however, because the statute requires “regular and periodic training on an annual basis.”

“The city thus failed to demonstrate it was entitled to immunity,” the court concluded. 

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News