What happened yesterday was a tragedy for the families of the 4 victims. However, the cause of the incident was clearly pilot error. They were both way too close to each other because they were vying for the best shot.

My question is this for anyone is more knowledgeable about the law - The Phoenix police chief has indicated the suspect will likely face some type of homicide charges in their deaths. How is that possible, that someone can be charged in the death of a third party that clearly did not cause. I am not saying the person was a saint and he should be charged accordingly based on his actual crimes, but his only role if you will in the deaths, was that his actions caused them to want to film him for ratings purposes. There was already a police helicopter monitoring the chase for law enforcement purposes. Tragic as this incident was, I don't think the law in this country allows for homicide charges to be sought.

I am with you on that one Joe.

Location: London UK

First, lets stop referring to these events as a police chase. That terminology makes it appear as if the police are the ones who initiated and are causing the action to continue. Nothing could be further from the truth.
These events are "flights from prosecution" by criminals who have broken the law and who are further breaking the law by failing to obey the lawful command of a police officer to stop. At any time during the "flight from prosecution", the criminal is free to end it by simply stopping. It is the criminal, NOT the police who is putting the public and the police lives at risk.
Now to the helicopter crash and the police chief's comment. The crash is a terrible tragedy that may cause the Phoenix TV stations to pool their resources for "flight from prosecution" events in the future. But, the helicopter crews were members of the news media, performing their job, a job that spelled out in the first ammendment to the US Constitution. Citizens have a right to know when a scumbag is breaking one law after another. Personally, I believe police should have the right to shoot and kill anyone who endangers the public during a "flight to avoid prosecution".
As to charges against the scumbag involved in this incident...He caused the deaths of the four helicopter crew members who were lawfully performing their jobs, jobs specifically mentioned in the US Constitution, and their deaths would not have occurred had the scumbag not engaged police in a "flight from prosecution".
I hope the scumbag is charged and they can make the charge stick. I am sick of scumbags.

Location: CT

I'm no lawyer, but I can't see how they could possibly make any type of homicide or wrongful death charges stick. These were overzealous reporters/pilots trying to cover what they deemed a breaking news story, not law enforcement agents tasked with tracking and/or apprehending a suspect wanted in connection with a crime. It's a sad story, but clearly not the suspects fault.

If I was running across the street to get a closer look at a house fire and got hit by a bus, and later the fire was determined to be arson, could the arsonist be charged with my death? I would think not.

These law enforcement agencies in Arizona have been known before to try and overstep their boundries and I think this is just another clear case of that.

Location: Baltimore

Rescue and Pete I agree with you 100%. And Ed, I agree with you on 2 fronts...these guys are scumbags..and they deserve the book to be thrown at them. But in all honesty, the tv news crews have to be held accountable for their own actions - the actions of not paying attention to what you are doing can have grave consequences...there were 3 other new copters who covered this same event w/o incident, along with the police copter. As was mentioned, it was these 2 crews particular overzealousness that caused the tragedy.

Put another way, we all know DUI is a crime. Suppose a drunk driver runs off the road and hits a fence and is injured. Now suppose emergency crews responding to the accident get into an accident themselves, and god forbid a FF dies (due to slippery pavement...etc etc). Does the mere fact that the driver that was involved in the original accident was drunk mean that an accident secondary to the incident involving the loss of life should result in additional charges brought to the DUI? I don't think you would find any court that would have charges stick (subject to appeal in the state and federal courts).

One final note - Ed I do agree with you that deadly force should be used more often in these cases, and that that police are justified at firing at a fleeing vehicle. However, the courts have ruled that under the constitution which you quoted, shooting at a vehicle or person merely because they are fleeing prosecution (or due to misdemeanor traffic or other charges) is unconstitional.

In Florida, I believe it's true that any death that occurs during the commission of a crime, that wouldn't have happened if it weren't for that crime, is considered to be a result of the crime. Therefore, the criminals are subsequently responsible and can be charged with their deaths. Lock 'em up and throw away the key.

Location: South Florida

The folks who wrote our Constitution would throw up if they came back to life and read many of the Liberal interpretations of that document by Left leaning A-hole judges. I have a poster that states it clearly, it is a copy of the Bill of Rights portion of the Constitution with a Red Circle and a Red line across that circle. Under that is the inscription "Void where prohibited by law", meaning many of the freedoms clearly spelled out in the Bill of Rights have been voided by unconstitutional laws that have been up-held by Leftist judges. Other freedoms have been voided by Leftist judges who make their own laws from the bench.
As to the analogy of Emergency responders being hurt or killed responding to a crash involving a drunk. Doesn't wash, There is nothing in the Constitution granting freedom of emergency responders. There is such a provision for the press.
Everyone needs to read and re-read the US Constitution and then read the writing of the men who drafted it to fully understand its meaning.

Location: CT

"Does the mere fact that the driver that was involved in the original accident was drunk mean that an accident secondary to the incident involving the loss of life should result in additional charges brought to the DUI? I don't think you would find any court that would have charges stick (subject to appeal in the state and federal courts)."

Yes. According to our laws in AZ, you did not have the legal right to be behind the wheel of the car, so had no legal right to be there. Bringing police or fire to your assistance makes you solely responsible for actions while on the scene. So if you are drunk, get in a wreck and I am called to the scene, and I am injured or killed at that scene, you are responsible for my injury or death, directly. Not only do judges find you guilty, so do juries, every day. You had no legal rights to be behind the wheel. You have no legal rights as a driver of a motor vehicle, if you are found to be under the influence, and you absorb all the liabilities of your actions. If granny runs me over and kills me, yes she is at fault for my death, but she is not responsible for it. The drunk is. Should be that way everywhere, but guessing by above comments its not. As for the fleeing felon, if he is convicted of the felony, he is then responsible for the deaths of the four helicopter crew because it was during the comission of a felony. Its pretty simple actually.

Location: Tucson, AZ

There was a pursuit in a nearby county. A Deputy responding to aid in this pursuit ran off the road and was killed. The Commonwealth's Attorney filed murder charges against the pursued felon. The Judge threw them out and the CA said he thought that would be the case but he tried anyway.

All good responses...but let change the scenario based on what everyone appears to support - which is the following - if anyone is killed while responding to or the event of a crime, the person who originally brought about said crime should be charged with murder (or manslaughter?). Every state in the union has a code in their vehicle section which states that every driver shall AT ALL TIMES, drive at a speed which allows them to maintain control of their vehicle. Specifically, under Illinois law, Code Section 95 1/2, 11-601(a) "Driving too fast for conditions", a driver may be cited (interpreted as driver was breaking the law) for driving at a speed that was unsafe and led to an accident, even if the speed was under the posted speed limit, and even if the exact speed was unknown. So person A, 30 year old woman, married, with 3 kids, driving 35 miles per hour in a 40 mile per hour zone, skids off the road and crashes. Technically, she violated the law (emphasis on violated the law, meaning she committed a criminal act) because she was driving too fast for conditions and she failed to maintain control of her vehicle at all times. So now we have officers and fd responders going to the scene of her "criminal act". Note I replaced accident because she was violating the law which caused the incident. In the event any of the responders a). has a heart attack and dies, or b) dies for any other reason en route or on the scene...using the logic above, she should be charged with their death. Had she not broken the law (driving too fast for conditions), they would not have not had to respond. So, she should be held accountable for their deaths? If you really think closely about this logic, you will see the flaws. 99% of all "accidents" can be classified as 1 party or the other breaking a law...driving too fast for conditions. Not a jury in the world would convict her, and not a prosecutor in the world would bring charges.

The laws that you are referring to, "deaths in relation to the commission of a felony" are not meant for helicopter pilots that crash into each other because they are not paying attention. They are meant to apply in situations where a kid runs out in the middle of the street while a vehicle is pursued and is struck by either the driver or a police officer. They are meant for when a person is shot by 1 person, and there are other people with the person..(get away driver, look-out)...etc...they are meant for an officer having a heart attack while attempting to subdue a person...all good reasons. The number 1 and 2 causes of death for all public safety professionals are heart attacks and vehicle accidents. If what you are suggesting is true...every heart attack and every vehicle death due to a call for service resulting from a crime, should be punishable...at that is simply not the case. Otherwise we would have a whole lot of grannies and family men/women imprisoned.

The difference is the police are responding to the flight from prosecution because they are enforcing the law and protecting the public.

The news people are covering the flight to compete in a ratings game. Pure and simple. There was no need for them to be there. I'll buy they have the right to be there. However, they have the responsibility to do it in a safe manner and follow all laws in the process. Typically, pilots are flying by some sort of fly by sight rules. In this case, it appears that one or both pilots paid too much attention to the chase and not enough attention to being the pilot.

To charge the suspect for that is ridiculous.

Here's another scenario:
If someone is driving and listening to the news reports of the flight, and being distracted, runs over and kills someone crossing the street, are the police or DA going to charge the driver or the suspect?

Lets hope the DA has at least an ounce of common sense and doesn't waste taxpayer money bringing charges that get dismissed by the judge.

Location: TX

That's why we have judges folks. As a retired Law
Enforcement Officer I can tell you that in my home
state of RI that this perp would be charged probably
with 2nd Degree Murder and/or Manslaughter in the 1st
because of the end result of this pursuit. The thinking is that if he had NOT done this the event would not have happened. The level of charges would also depend on the original offense he committed, i.e. was it a felony and/or misdemeanor, that's why we have Departments of Attorneys General and those are the folks who have the final say as to how the
suspect is charged. The arresting police can recommend and lodge charges based on the events but the AG's office has the final say. If it goes all the way to a true bill of indictment then its up to the prosecution, the jury and the Judge to make the
final decision as to guilt/innocence and what sentence is given. Off the record I would hope that
this perp fell down alot on his way to the station.
Ronbo

Location: Florida

Maybe the stairs were slippery

What if these two news helicopters were covering a fire in a building that turned out to be arson and crashed? Would the arsonist then be held accountable for their deaths? How about if it was determined that the fire was the result of improper installation of electrical wires? Would the electricians then be held for their deaths? I would guess not. Even though these news personnel were within thier rights to cover this story, they were not acticng in an offical law enforcement capacity. Like I said, it's sad and I feel bad for the families that lost loved ones, but it is clearly not the suspects fault. These two pilots could have easily collided while covering a parade or sporting event or some other incident where there was no police involvement. One or both pilots made a fatal error and as sad as that is, it's the way it is.

Location: Baltimore

Rescue 131, that exact thing happened here in CA. My partners uncle was an air attack pilot for CDF. He was involved in a mid-air crash with another tanker pilot and both were killed while fighting a wildfire. The state charged the arsonist that set the fire with manslaughter. It didn't work though. Any half way decent defense attorney could defend that one. In CA if somebody is killed during the commission of a felony, you can be charged with that death. I think it's a big stretch though to charge the guy with the death of the news crews. Cops, FF's, etc have to be there. News crews don't. It's their job to cover a story, but it all comes down to ratings and who gets the best story. Why do you need multiple news copters covering the same exact story?? For ratings, nothing else but that. I agree with you, where does it end?? The blame has to stop somewhere.

Here in GA in the neighboring county (Coweta) about two years ago a suspect was fleeing from police. A sheriff's deputy performed a pit manuever that forced the suspect off the road. The suspect of course, wasn't wearing a seat belt and in the ensuing accident was left paralyzed. He hired a lawyer and sued the deputy. The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court, which ruled this spring that the deputy was not liable. One win for the good guys!

Location: GA

Guys,

It's called felony murder rule...if in the commission of a felony your actions cause someone elses death you are criminally liable for their death and are charged accordingly. If not for this guys actions, there would not have been a helicopter crash and 4 lives would not have been lost, pretty simple concept that is covered in basic criminal law courses.

And my response is in no way meant to condesend towards anyone.

The TV Station (owners & managers), plus the pilots were 100% responsible due to carelessness. Four are dead for Higher TV Ratings. These jackassess are lucky they didn't kill anyone on the ground. To blame the perp is just passing the buck. If either of the pilots had survived, they would be facing Involuntary Manslaughter, and a permanent revocation of their pilots licences.

My 2 cents.

What Felony was the perp performing? I guess I haven't seen the whole story.

But, the TV news helicopters did not HAVE to be following this guy. They were not acting in a law enforcement capacity. If these were two police helicopters keeping track of where this suspect was heading, then I would 100% agree, it was the suspects fault. In this case, it was carelessness/pilot error and no ones fault but their own.

Location: Baltimore

I live in Phoenix and until a year ago worked in the tall building across the street from the crash site. The news copters have always been to close but the real story this weekend is that a Phoenix police officer was shot and killed LOD and it is second page news.

I have no respect for the media as far as I'm concerned they are second class citizens.

The chase it sounds like they were trying to do a DUI stop and the guy took off. Rammed a patrol car, car jacked another vehicle. Don't know if the guy was illegal or not but AZ will throw the book at him. There is no mercy or understanding here.

Pete

Location: Glendale, AZ

In fact, it appears that he committed multiple felonies, eluding, carjacking, assault on an officer, et al.

Yes this clown did a lot of wrong stuff he's probably looking at a lot of jail time already. The state AJ is tough and the judges are tougher.

Location: Glendale, AZ