Lawmakers began second-round discussion of a bill Feb. 24 that would lessen the liability facing the state and political subdivisions in the event of a police pursuit.<\/p>\n
Currently, the state and subdivisions are held liable for the death, injury or property damage to an innocent third party caused by the action of a law enforcement officer during a vehicular pursuit. LB188, introduced by Syracuse Sen. Dan Watermeier, would exclude certain passengers from the liability protections.<\/p>\n
Excluded would be any passenger who:
\n\u2022 enters into the vehicle without coercion knowing, or with a reasonable belief, that the driver of the vehicle is under the influence of alcohol or drugs;
\n\u2022 fails to take reasonable steps to persuade the driver to stop the vehicle;
\n\u2022 promotes, provokes or persuades the driver to engage in flight from law enforcement;\u00a0or
\n\u2022 is sought to be apprehended by law enforcement.<\/p>\n
Watermeier introduced an amendment, adopted 31-0, which removed the bill\u2019s exclusion for passengers who knowingly enter a vehicle with a reasonable belief that the driver is under the influence of alcohol or drugs.<\/p>\n
The amendment also clarified that in the event a passenger is excluded from liability protection because he or she is sought to be apprehended by law enforcement for felonious conduct, that conduct must have occurred immediately prior to or during the chase.<\/p>\n
Watermeier said the amendment is a compromise to address concerns raised on general file while still protecting taxpayers.<\/p>\n
\u201cDo we really want taxpayers paying the bill for the injury of passengers who are actively engaged in criminal activity?\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Columbus Sen. Paul Schumacher introduced an amendment that would require the pursuing law enforcement officer to prove that the passenger provoked the driver to engage in a high-speed pursuit or is subject to an arrest warrant or felony that prompted the chase.<\/p>\n
He said it would place the burden of proof firmly on the pursuing agency.<\/p>\n
\u201c[We] want to dissuade these chases,\u201d Schumacher said. \u201cIt is not a good thing unless there is really serious conduct that is prompting the chase.\u201d<\/p>\n
Lincoln Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks supported the amendment, saying the risks of high-speed chases far outweigh the benefits.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn 2014, USA Today<\/em> reported that 385 people died across the country in high-speed chases. Of those killed, 73 were bystanders and 77 were passengers in the vehicle,\u201d she said. \u201cWe need to be helping the police and providing them with safer alternatives. High-speed chases should be a last-ditch effort.\u201d<\/p>\n Watermeier opposed the Schumacher amendment, saying it would be more restrictive than what is already in statute. He said the provisions only would encourage micromanagement of law enforcement officers.<\/p>\n The amendment failed on a 16-21 vote. A motion brought by Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers to recommit the bill to the Judiciary Committee was pending when the Legislature adjourned for the day.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Lawmakers began second-round discussion of a bill Feb. 24 that would lessen the liability facing the state and political subdivisions<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[13],"tags":[107],"class_list":["post-18650","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-judiciary","tag-sen-dan-watermeier"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18650","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=18650"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18650\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18704,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18650\/revisions\/18704"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=18650"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=18650"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=18650"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}