No Charges for Either Party in Police Crash That Killed a Six-year-old Child

Jack Baruth
by Jack Baruth

If you’ve been reading this site for a while, you might recall the incident nearly four years ago when your humble author managed to collect a Hyundai Sonata in the B-pillar. Both I and the woman in the front passenger seat were nontrivially injured in the crash, but the months and years of pain and surgery afterwards were made considerably easier to bear by the fact that my son, who was sitting in the right rear seat, escaped injury. I cannot tell you what I would have done or how I would have felt if he had been injured or killed.

Five months ago, a woman in Albuquerque made a left-hand turn across a busy urban intersection. As she did so, her Ford Escape was struck by a police car traveling at nearly 70 miles per hour. The six-year-old boy in the right rear seat was killed.

After a comprehensive investigation, the county sheriff has recommended that no charges be filed against either the driver of the Ford Escape or the officer who struck the vehicle. Their rationale for that recommendation is easy to see and there’s no reason to Monday-morning quarterback a crash with a result this tragic. We should, however, be talking about the circumstances that made that crash not only possible but likely.

In 2012, I suggested that police cars be governed to a safe and legal speed. My concern at the time was with reckless behavior on the part of police, particularly with regards to speed enforcement. If you’ve ever been buzzed by a state trooper doing 110 mph to catch a “danger to society” who is doing 85, you’ll have an idea of why I don’t think we need those dangerous, risky interactions between police and civilian vehicles on America’s freeways.

In the case of this Albuquerque incident, however, the officer wasn’t displaying his narcissism or his addiction to personal power. Rather, he was making the maximum possible speed to respond to a situation where a “teen” was threatening employees at a grocery store with a machete. That’s the kind of situation where you’d like police to show up as quickly as possible, although here in concealed-carry-crazy Ohio I suspect anybody who waved a machete around at my local Kroger would be the recipient of more incoming ordnance than the HMS Hood within seconds.

I think that Keisean Anderson, the machete-waver in question, should have manslaughter added to his remarkably short and mild list of charges. Regardless of that fellow’s eventual disposition, however, the fact remains that police do occasionally have a need to respond quickly to violent situations. So how do you handle this? Do you make them slow down for every intersection, the way I’ve seen ambulances do in Texas and other Southwest states? Do you limit their permissible speed to a multiple of the speed limit, which in this case was 40 mph?

Furthermore, how much duty does a citizen have to look down the road before making a left turn? If the speed limit is 40 mph, should she look down just far enough to ensure that there is no 40 mph traffic heading her way? 60 mph traffic? 70 mph traffic? Why didn’t she see the lights and hear the sirens? The officer in question had both activated.

I’ve argued on this site before that passive safety, not driver training, is what truly saves lives on American roads. After reading about this incident, however, I have to wonder a bit about that. We don’t need to turn everyday drivers into Nico Rosberg or Sebastian Vettel. We just need to educate them in the proper use of vision. Keeping your eyes high and alert will make it possible for you to see things like a police car approaching nearly twice as quickly as you might expect. And it will save you from ever having to mourn the avoidable death of a child. I was almost in that situation and I can tell you from experience. There is nothing worse.

Take a moment to look around before you make a choice on the road. The life you save might not be your own. It might be more important than that.

Jack Baruth
Jack Baruth

More by Jack Baruth

Join the conversation
2 of 68 comments
  • Shortest Circuit Shortest Circuit on Sep 26, 2017

    I suspect with the B&B, you are preaching to the choir Jack. Yes every driver should receive proper training on how to operate a motor vehicle. Failing that, just good ole' dumb common sense should be advocated. "Is it a good idea for me to drive this 5000lb piece of steel 75mph while texting?" "I'm about to join a highway, should I accelerate from 35mph or just throw the indicator and hope for the best?" etc,etc....

  • Erikstrawn Erikstrawn on Sep 26, 2017

    Man, excellent comments! My take after reading all this: 1) No matter how you slice it, he police officer was going way too fast through the intersection. He also has a history as a low-performing driver. 2) The intersection was too complicated and busy for the driver who was hit to quickly sort out what was happening, especially with how quickly the police car arrived. 3) Cars today are far too insulated from the outside world. Drivers should be engaged, not cocooned. 4) Mr. Machete was seen as such a threat to public safety that officers felt obliged to ignore their safety protocol, to an extent that should not have been possible (80mph through an intersection in a 40mph zone). Mr. Machete is most culpable in causing the situation, but if he's waving a machete in a grocery store, no law or threat of punishment is going to change his behavior. He needs a lot of time in an 8x8 cell to think about the consequences of his actions, but he also needs a lot of counseling. The officer needs to be taken out of his car. If he would like to reaccomplish driver's training and the police driving course, he could eventually return to a car - but on probation for a long while. The police department needs to try to make things right with the family who lost their child. Check in on them every now and then. The mother should consider taking a defensive driving course and take a self-conscious look at how she drives. Is the stereo at a reasonable level? Is the cell phone out-of-sight and out-of-mind? The lesson for the rest of us is that driving is a performance art, but most of us aren't artists, and many of us have a Nero complex when it comes to driving.

  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X As much problems as I had with my '96 Chevy Impala SS.....I would love to try one again. I've seen a Dark Cherry Metallic one today and it looked great.
  • Susan O’Neil There is a good reason to keep the Chevrolet Malibu and other 4 door family sedans! You can transport your parents and other somewhat handicapped people comfortably and safety! If someone can stand and pivot you can put them in your car. An armrest in the back seat is appreciated and a handle above the door! Oh…and leather seats so your passenger can slide across the seat! 😊Plus, you can place a full sized wheelchair or walker in the trunk! The car sits a little lower…so it’s doable! I currently have a Ford Fusion and we have a Honda Accord. Our previous cars were Mercury Sables-excellent for transporting handicapped people and equipment! As the population ages-sedans are a very practical choice! POV from a retired handicapped advocate and daughter! 😊
  • Freddie Remember those ads that say "Call your doctor if you still have...after four hours"?You don't need to call your doctor, just get behind the wheel of a CUV. In fact, just look at one.I'm a car guy with finite resources; I can't afford a practical car during the week plus a fun car on the weekend. My solution is my Honda Civic Si 4 door sedan. Maybe yours is a Dodge Charger (a lot of new Chargers are still on dealer lots).
  • Daniel J Interesting in that we have several weeks where the temperature stays below 45 but all weather tires can't be found in a shop anywhere. I guess all seasons are "good enough".
  • Steve Biro For all the talk about sedans vs CUVs and SUVs, I simply can’t bring myself to buy any modern vehicle. And I know it’s only going to get worse.