Car Chase suspect responsible for copter crash?

[Mirror Lake 444]

Am I missing something here? As bad as this guy is, is he responsible for this helicopter crash? Did he twist these guy's arms to follow him by helicopter? Isn't this part of the risk of covering a car chase? Seems to me some f'd up flying the helicopter which has nothing to do with the guy on the ground.


Witnesses: Helicopters seemed fine before collision


(CNN) -- Eyewitnesses to the collision of two news helicopters in Phoenix, Arizona, in which four people were killed, told investigators they noticed no problems with either aircraft before the collision, a National Transportation Safety Board spokesman said Saturday.


Police say suspect Christopher Jones will likely be charged with the deaths of the four killed in the crash.

Of the seven witnesses interviewed as of Saturday evening, none saw any pieces fall off the helicopters before the collision or noticed smoke or erratic movement by either aircraft, NTSB spokesman Steve Chealander told reporters. Witnesses also told the NTSB "go team" investigating the collision that they heard no change in the sound of the helicopter engines, Chealander said.

The helicopters were tracking a police chase through the streets of downtown Phoenix when they collided at midday Friday, crashing to the ground in flames and heavy smoke.

KTVK-TV photojournalist Jim Cox and pilot Scott Bowerback were killed, as were KNXV-TV photographer Rick Krolak and pilot Craig Smith.

Witnesses said the KTVK helicopter appeared stationary when the KNXV helicopter struck it, Chealander said. "That's as good as we can tell you right now. That's as much as we know."

Charred debris from the helicopters remained scattered in a downtown park, which was closed to the public. Watch smoke and flames pour from debris »

The rotor blade from one helicopter hit the front windshield of a truck, but the driver was uninjured, and the blade imbedded itself in the asphalt, Chealander said. Another rotor blade was found on top of a parking garage about half a mile away, he said.

Chealander said eight NTSB investigators began arriving in Phoenix late Friday night. They will take the information they collect, including interviews with witnesses, back to Washington for analysis, he said.


The NTSB will issue a preliminary report on the crash within five business days, and the final report will be issued in about nine months, he said.

Chealander said a pond in the park where the helicopters crashed will be partially drained for any further evidence, and police divers would be sent in to recover the rest. Water in the pond has been tested and found not to be hazardous, he said.

"Our condolences go out to the families and friends of the victims," Chealander said. "It's heartbreaking to see these kinds of accidents."

Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris said the chase began after police received a report of a stolen vehicle and began pursuing a suspect, who abandoned that vehicle and allegedly stole a truck. The truck was being chased at the time of the chopper collision.

The suspect, identified Saturday as Christopher Jones, later bailed out of the truck and barricaded himself in a house, where he was captured, police said.

Jones was arraigned Saturday on four counts of aggravated assault, two counts of theft of means of transportation and one count of resisting arrest. His bond was set at $1 million after a prosecutor told the judge Jones may flee.

"He put the entire community in danger. ... Everyone on the street was a possible victim," the prosecutor said.

Jones said in the hearing he blacked out in the house, and when he came to, police used tear gas and a Taser on him.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/27/helicopter.crash/index.html

[ptac4x4]

A person who commits certain felonies can be charged with murder if a death results from the commmission of the crime, under Arizona law.

That is why the charges are being considered.

per A.R.S. §13-1104 "Second Degree Murder" occurs if without premeditation a person intentionally causes the death of another person or, knowing that his conduct will cause the death or serious physical injury, such person does cause the death of another person; or under the circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, such person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death and thereby causes the death of another person.

In the Vehicular Crime setting, Second Degree Murder is normally not charged. In order for it to be charged, there must be a showing of "extreme indifference" to human life. This could be drag racing through traffic on the freeway, traveling the wrong way on a freeway while fleeing from police, road rage, or things of this nature.

[NiteGuy]

A person who commits certain felonies can be charged with murder if a death results from the commmission of the crime, under Arizona law.

That is why the charges are being considered.

per A.R.S. §13-1104 "Second Degree Murder" occurs if without premeditation a person intentionally causes the death of another person or, knowing that his conduct will cause the death or serious physical injury, such person does cause the death of another person; or under the circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life, such person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death and thereby causes the death of another person.

Well, by that reading, charging him makes even less sense.

He did nothing to intentionally cause the deaths on board the helicopters. He had know way of knowing that his conduct would cause their death or serious injury, and while he may have been reckless in eluding police, it would be a real stretch to say that his actions caused their deaths, unless they can show his truck went airborne, al la the latest Die Hard movie, and forced one aircraft to veer into the other.

These kinds oflaws are generally reserved for say, the driver of a getaway car at a bank heist, where one of the bad guys in the bank shoots and kills someone. In that case, everyone involved in the robbery can be charged. Or, as noted, it's reserved for someone eluding police, where because of the speeds of the cars, someone is forced off of the road, and killed.

But charging him because one news station pilot trying to get pictures for ratings, wasn't paying attention and flew into another news chopper trying to get pictures for ratings? That's pushing things in my opinion.

[TomAZ]

But charging him because one news station pilot trying to get pictures for ratings, wasn't paying attention and flew into another news chopper trying to get pictures for ratings? That's pushing things in my opinion.[/QUOTE]



BINGO! One of the first things taught to student-pilots is to keep your head on a swivel.

[HAVOC451]

This is one of those "tough on crime" laws that were (and still are) all the rage in many state legislatures in the past decade or two. They don't really cut crime because criminals don't spend alot of time thinking things through.

Thre was a case here a few years ago where a guy and his young sons were out throwing firecrackers into a little pond. They accidently started a grass fire. they tried to put it out but it got away from them. It became a huge deal. Homes were lost and a helicopter crashed, killing the pilot. The guy was convicted on second degree murder and is serving 15 years. He had never befor been arrested and his wife and kids were left without a provider.

So is it fair?
Probably not.
Will convicting the car chase guy for murder make it safer to cover interesting things from a helicopter for TV?
Absolutely not.
As long as politicians can puff themselves up with such superficial solutions to crime we'll see more and more of this kind of thing.

[ScummyD]

I heard this BS yesterday. This guy should never be charged for the stupidity of those news crews which led to their own deaths. How rridiculous!!!

I actually laughed out loud when I heard they crashed and died, these scum. Serves them right. It is sad and too bad for their families and loved ones, but I shed no tears for those that died.

[billygardener]

He shouldn't be charged for this...but why are the helicopter people scum?

[Crosscheck]

I actually laughed out loud when I heard they crashed and died, these scum. Serves them right. It is sad and too bad for their families and loved ones, but I shed no tears for those that died.

You mean laugh out loud like some Middle Easterners did when they learned of 9-11?

[ptac4x4]

I actually laughed out loud when I heard they crashed and died, these scum. Serves them right. It is sad and too bad for their families and loved ones, but I shed no tears for those that died.

What a sad point of view. I think you are out of line to call them "scums". Especially if you did not know the indiviuals. To make a point that news people can get be agressive is one thing. Your statement not called for.

[steveksux]

Felony murder. In the course of committing certain felonies, the crook is responsible for any deaths that occur, even if he did nothing directly related to cause them.

If a cop chasing a crook runs over a group of nuns, the crook is responsible for their deaths, not the cop that ran them over. Woman has heart attack during a robbery? Murder. Stuff like that. Often leads to bizarre sounding charges you would think aren't the responsiblity of the crooks. The idea is that anything that happens in the chain of events started by the original crime is the responsibility of the person committing the crime. Crashes durign car chases, even that don't involve the crook are traditionally covered.

Having said that, this is a novel application of felony murder, not sure if this will stick or not. Certainly seems to be pushing the boundaries. I suppose you can argue that news covereage of the car chase is a logical result of commiting the crime, so it may not be so far fetched from a legal standpoint, even if its not a common interpretation. Maybe its only not been commonly applied because helicopter crashes have not been common during car chases. I think even in cases where the police run traffic signals without lights or sirens, or people run lights, and subsequently get clobbered in car chases (thus the victims or others outside the criminal contribute to their own deaths or those of others through some negligence), the perp is still chargeable under felony murder in some cases. So the fact that the pilots should have been paying attention and missed each other, or they should have simply stayed at different altitudes to avoid collisions, and the pilots are definitely at fault here, may not matter from the perspective of the felony murder statutes.

This is not something lay people (including myself) are really competent to address. We'd need input from some of the lawyers versed in the finer elements of the legal archana to step in and set the record straight.

Randy

[billygardener]

They're just a bunch of little Eichmans playing their clerical roles as cogs in the giant, imperialist local news industry!!!

[dittohead not!]

This is one of those "tough on crime" laws that were (and still are) all the rage in many state legislatures in the past decade or two. They don't really cut crime because criminals don't spend alot of time thinking things through.

Thre was a case here a few years ago where a guy and his young sons were out throwing firecrackers into a little pond. They accidently started a grass fire. they tried to put it out but it got away from them. It became a huge deal. Homes were lost and a helicopter crashed, killing the pilot. The guy was convicted on second degree murder and is serving 15 years. He had never befor been arrested and his wife and kids were left without a provider.

So is it fair?
Probably not.
Will convicting the car chase guy for murder make it safer to cover interesting things from a helicopter for TV?
Absolutely not.
As long as politicians can puff themselves up with such superficial solutions to crime we'll see more and more of this kind of thing.

It not only is not fair, but isn't going to do a thing to deter crime. Is someone going to refrain from setting off firecrackers because some guy was prosecuted for murder as a result of unlikely, but possible, occurrences? Hardly.

This part of your post is the real reason for things like this:

As long as politicians can puff themselves up with such superficial solutions to crime we'll see more and more of this kind of thing.

[steveksux]

It not only is not fair, but isn't going to do a thing to deter crime. Is someone going to refrain from setting off firecrackers because some guy was prosecuted for murder as a result of unlikely, but possible, occurrences? Hardly.

This part of your post is the real reason for things like this:Generally speaking the most common felony murder charges are protecting cops from legal repercussions of chases, shootouts, etc. Are you going to chase if you could be held liable in case you crash chasing someone else? Are you going to risk your butt if you miss the bad guy and shoot an innocent person in the background?

These creative applications of felony murder don't deter crime. I don't think that's the point, nobody expects stuff like this to deter crime. Hell, if the sentences for robbing a bank and murder don't deter bank robbers and murderers, its not likely they'll even think of these sorts of consequences that could result from their crime. Way down on the list of stuff they worry about.

Is it so crazy to hold people responsible for the consequences of their actions? And for criminals, even the unintended consequences of their actions? I'm not averse to piling on charges to criminals. This might be an unfortunate accident in the absence of a crime starting the chain of events that led up to it. But with a crime as the triggering event, its not exactly an accident due to the vagaries of fate or an honest mistake.


Randy

[HAVOC451]

Generally speaking the most common felony murder charges are protecting cops from legal repercussions of chases, shootouts, etc. Are you going to chase if you could be held liable in case you crash chasing someone else? Are you going to risk your butt if you miss the bad guy and shoot an innocent person in the background?

These creative applications of felony murder don't deter crime. I don't think that's the point, nobody expects stuff like this to deter crime. Hell, if the sentences for robbing a bank and murder don't deter bank robbers and murderers, its not likely they'll even think of these sorts of consequences that could result from their crime. Way down on the list of stuff they worry about.

Is it so crazy to hold people responsible for the consequences of their actions? And for criminals, even the unintended consequences of their actions? I'm not averse to piling on charges to criminals. This might be an unfortunate accident in the absence of a crime starting the chain of events that led up to it. But with a crime as the triggering event, its not exactly an accident due to the vagaries of fate or an honest mistake.


Randy

I think you're right that the origins of such laws are, in part, to protect police officers (and municipalities) from being jailed or sued for doing their duty. The problem seems to be that too big a blanket often falls over cases like these.
If a pursuing squad car had spun out and killed four pedestrians, then fine, but the news copters were there by choise.

[Sock Puppet]

but the news copters were there by choise.

Choice as in it was their job to do so... :sorry:

[steveksux]

If a pursuing squad car had spun out and killed four pedestrians, then fine, but the news copters were there by choise.I get that distinction. Its definitely a more tenuous connection than that. But its still as a direct result of a crime committed by the guy... Take a bank robbery. If pedestrians choose to see what all the commotion was about at the bank and get hit in the crossfire, I'm pretty sure felony murder still applies, even though they chose to be there and didn't have to be.

Now I'm not sure if felony murder applies to this situation or not... Just saying its not necessarily as strange as it appears. The argument can be made. Whether it'll hold up or not is not something I'm betting on either way. It'll depend on the exact wording of the local statutes, and will be fought tooth and nail by both sides in the case before its resolved. I'm just saying its not as cut and dried, as ridiculous as it appears.

Randy

[dittohead not!]

I get that distinction. Its definitely a more tenuous connection than that. But its still as a direct result of a crime committed by the guy... Take a bank robbery. If pedestrians choose to see what all the commotion was about at the bank and get hit in the crossfire, I'm pretty sure felony murder still applies, even though they chose to be there and didn't have to be.

Now I'm not sure if felony murder applies to this situation or not... Just saying its not necessarily as strange as it appears. The argument can be made. Whether it'll hold up or not is not something I'm betting on either way. It'll depend on the exact wording of the local statutes, and will be fought tooth and nail by both sides in the case before its resolved. I'm just saying its not as cut and dried, as ridiculous as it appears.

Randy

No, it's not cut and dried, and there are certainly arguments on both sides. Did the car chase result in the deaths of the helicopter pilots and reporters? Well, indirectly. What if the reporters had been racing to the scene in a car, and crashed on the way? Would that be a murder case also? It seems to me that this case stretches the law a bit.

Another thing that strikes me is this: If the newspapers can chase the perp via helicopter, why can't the police do the same thing? No one is going to outrun a helicopter on the ground. They have to stop sooner or later, and there will be the chopper, still reporting on their whereabouts. It seems to me it would be a whole lot safer and more effective to chase the bad guys in the air.

[steveksux]

No, it's not cut and dried, and there are certainly arguments on both sides. Did the car chase result in the deaths of the helicopter pilots and reporters? Well, indirectly. What if the reporters had been racing to the scene in a car, and crashed on the way? Would that be a murder case also? It seems to me that this case stretches the law a bit. I don't disagree at all. I was just refuting those that implied it was preposterous.

Another thing that strikes me is this: If the newspapers can chase the perp via helicopter, why can't the police do the same thing? No one is going to outrun a helicopter on the ground. They have to stop sooner or later, and there will be the chopper, still reporting on their whereabouts. It seems to me it would be a whole lot safer and more effective to chase the bad guys in the air.
Depends if the chopper is nearby. Probably more news choppers than police choppers, might have just got lucky to be in the air and the area in time. Lots of times the chase is over before they'd have a chance to get a chopper there, and they'd still have to chase until the chopper got there. They all have different chase policies, depending on how many lawsuits they've lost...

Randy

[ptac4x4]

Another thing that strikes me is this: If the newspapers can chase the perp via helicopter, why can't the police do the same thing? No one is going to outrun a helicopter on the ground. They have to stop sooner or later, and there will be the chopper, still reporting on their whereabouts. It seems to me it would be a whole lot safer and more effective to chase the bad guys in the air.

In many cases news helicopters and police helicopters are both over the scene. In this case following a suspect. News helicopters are generally assigned a higher altitude and stay further back than the police helicopter. News cameras allow for them to zoom in to get close ups. I have seen times when news helicopters stayed in the air and followed a suspect when the police helicopter had to leave to refuel, therebye assisting police.

This was a tragic event. Not sure if the crash can be pinned on the criminal, but AZ law allows for the filing of the charges if the State choices.