"Both Tobin and Squire pursue and the chase eventually ends with Squire’s vehicle pulling up alongside the stolen truck and using a PIT manoeuvre to stop the vehicle. A PIT (precision immobilization technique) manoeuvre is when the driver of a police vehicle comes up behind a vehicle being pursued and taps the front end of the police vehicle against the rear corner of the vehicle being pursued, forcing the driver of the vehicle being pursued to spin out of control."
I've witnessed this successful tactic many times.
If the Force doesn't approve of its use, how did the Member learn the tactic?
Police experts explain the PIT and offer a demonstration video.
"The precision immobilization technique (PIT) has been in law enforcement use since the 1980s. PIT is unquestionably an effective tool for ending vehicle pursuits, but not without controversy. A well-executed PIT deployment usually results in the pursued vehicle spinning out to a stop, followed by the arrest of a dazed driver."
If the newspaper article is accurate, this is an internal discipline case, not a provincial prosecution.
First
The Independent Investigations Office of BC (IIOBC) and the provincial prosecutor's office have a track record of misjudgement and reckless prosecution.
Second
A four year investigation is unacceptable. The British Columbia government needs to investigate the IIOBC to determine their qualifications and the extent of their negative track record.
Delta Police Department (BC) Chief Neil Dubord, commented in the February issue of Blue Line magazine that, "When our officers witness a car zip past them at high speeds in a school zone, they make every attempt to stop that cr and take necessary action." Page 14/15.
I'm a newly landed immigrant from California so my knowledge of Canadian law enforcement is limited. However, my police experience questions this action. It should have been an internal disciplinary measure, not a trial. Would a civilian be prosecuted? Also, four years? Don't Mounties have a union?
Retired RCMP Members R. Davidson, R. Drought and currently serving Member Inspector L. Wood portray themselves in an operation which picks up after the failed anti-money laundering investigation E-Pirate. Wood assembles seasoned investigators who uncover extensive money laundering in British Columbia. Instrumental in the criminality is a gambling ship operating off the West Coast. Interagency cooperation involves the LAPD, Secret Service, U.S. Coast Guard, Canadian Security Intelligence Service-CSIS, RCMP Vancouver and Surrey Police.
Delta Police Department (BC) Chief Neil Dubord, commented in the February issue of Blue Line magazine that, "When our officers witness a car zip past them at high speeds in a school zone, they make every attempt to stop that cr and take necessary action." Page 14/15.
https://www.blueline.ca/transforming-the-culture-of-policing/
I'm a newly landed immigrant from California so my knowledge of Canadian law enforcement is limited. However, my police experience questions this action. It should have been an internal disciplinary measure, not a trial. Would a civilian be prosecuted? Also, four years? Don't Mounties have a union?
Retired RCMP Members R. Davidson, R. Drought and currently serving Member Inspector L. Wood portray themselves in an operation which picks up after the failed anti-money laundering investigation E-Pirate. Wood assembles seasoned investigators who uncover extensive money laundering in British Columbia. Instrumental in the criminality is a gambling ship operating off the West Coast. Interagency cooperation involves the LAPD, Secret Service, U.S. Coast Guard, Canadian Security Intelligence Service-CSIS, RCMP Vancouver and Surrey Police.
“...Mounties are not supposed to pursue vehicles believed stolen and officers are required to disengage in the event chases becomes unsafe."
There must be more to this policy than the above which reads as incomprehensible.