dept seeks manslaughter charge on one of own

[satpak77]

Discuss....

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/Officer_who_hit_killed_colleague_may_be_charged.ht ml

(older article)

http://www.woai.com/news/local/story/SAPD-Officer-Hits-Other-Cop-with-Patrol-Car/zKc4h2lRDkyPt-KVT2CR6w.cspx

[SgtCHP]

Details of the accident raised several troubling points about Seaton's actions moments before the collision: He was going between 98-102 mph down a stretch of Potranco Road with a 45 mph posted speed limit. He did not activate his lights and sirens, and the call to which he was responding to was deemed minor enough that it was flagged as a "code one" call, or the least urgent.


Totally irresponsible and negligent!

The move to charge him criminally is probably a CYA move on the part of the city to stave off major civil litigation; not to mention, the errant officer was way out of line.

Just because there is a recommendation for charges the ultimate decision is made by the District Attorney or State's Attorney.

Either way, it is a difficult situation for all concerned.

[Kieth M.]

Totally irresponsible and negligent!

The move to charge him criminally is probably a CYA move on the part of the city to stave off major civil litigation;

Either way, it is a difficult situation for all concerned.

1) +1

2) Stave off? Litigation would likely follow either way, excpet that now the department has done the investigation that the plaintiff's attorney would have to hire outside resources for. A guilty verdict in a criminal case would go very far assisting the plaintiff's side in a civil court.

3) Enough heaping servings of misery in this case to go all around, for sure.

[PhilipCal]

Not saying it wasn't true, but I'm curious as to how the estimate of speed was obtained (98-102 mph). In any case, there seems to be no logical reason for the Officer to have been speeding in any manner to reach the call in question,At the end of the day, there aren't any winners in situations like this. A life is lost, a career ended. There's enough collateral damage to last lifetimes. As has been mentioned, there's no doubt a large CYA motivation here as well.

[RudyDep]

Not saying it wasn't true, but I'm curious as to how the estimate of speed was obtained (98-102 mph). In any case, there seems to be no logical reason for the Officer to have been speeding in any manner to reach the call in question,At the end of the day, there aren't any winners in situations like this. A life is lost, a career ended. There's enough collateral damage to last lifetimes. As has been mentioned, there's no doubt a large CYA motivation here as well.

The speed was verified by GPS. It was STUPID and you are right...NO ONE WINS this one.

[PhilipCal]

The speed was verified by GPS. It was STUPID and you are right...NO ONE WINS this one.

Okay--Thanks! I've been retired for a little over three years. Guess it's starting to show:)But, yeah you're right. It's a bad deal across the board.

[satpak77]

I guess my heartburn with this is the fact that the officer who caused the wreck, is lying in a hospital bed in critical (or at least bad) condition while the DA's office is trying to indict him, an indictment being pushed by the department according to the news.

What is the statute of limitations for this? 5 years? (I don't know...). In any event, let the dust settle, let the officer heal up, then move forward if need be.

As an aside, I don't think this charge will get a conviction in a court with a jury. My opinion. See cut and pasted Texas Penal Code for FYI.

Just my two cents, but I think a good police attorney, with expert witnesses (ala Caliber Press, etc), etc etc, will be able to present a version to the jury that will result in non-conviction.

Again, my opinion. This case is important for all of us (and we ALL have done this...) who have driven more than the posted speed limit (grant you not 100 MPH) enroute to a call that was not exactly a major emergency.

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.005.00.000019.00.htm

PENAL CODE

TITLE 5. OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON

CHAPTER 19. CRIMINAL HOMICIDE

§ 19.01. TYPES OF CRIMINAL HOMICIDE. (a) A person
commits criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowingly,
recklessly, or with criminal negligence causes the death of an
individual.
(b) Criminal homicide is murder, capital murder,
manslaughter, or criminally negligent homicide.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 1123, ch. 426, art. 2, § 1,
eff. Jan. 1, 1974; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff.
Sept. 1, 1994.

§ 19.04. MANSLAUGHTER. (a) A person commits an offense
if he recklessly causes the death of an individual.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second
degree.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Renumbered from Penal Code § 19.04 by Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p.
1123, ch. 426, art. 2, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts
1987, 70th Leg., ch. 307, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Renumbered
from Penal Code § 19.05 and amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch.
900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

[PhilipCal]

At the end of the day, it's probably going to be a question for a jury. Still doesn't make the situation any less tragic for all concerned.

[usmcrob]

I guess my heartburn with this is the fact that the officer who caused the wreck, is lying in a hospital bed in critical (or at least bad) condition while the DA's office is trying to indict him, an indictment being pushed by the department according to the news.

What is the statute of limitations for this? 5 years? (I don't know...). In any event, let the dust settle, let the officer heal up, then move forward if need be.

As an aside, I don't think this charge will get a conviction in a court with a jury. My opinion. See cut and pasted Texas Penal Code for FYI.

Just my two cents, but I think a good police attorney, with expert witnesses (ala Caliber Press, etc), etc etc, will be able to present a version to the jury that will result in non-conviction.

Again, my opinion. This case is important for all of us (and we ALL have done this...) who have driven more than the posted speed limit (grant you not 100 MPH) enroute to a call that was not exactly a major emergency.

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.005.00.000019.00.htm

How was he not reckless? Not that I want to hang one of my own, but how could anyone say that he was not reckless?

This is the statute on reckless:
A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.

[silasblack]

^
+1

Even going code 3 you have to clear intersections when running red lights. Going even the speed limit while running a red is reckless let alone 50 above it.

[RudyDep]

I spoke to one of the prosecutors who stated that Off Seaton will be charged with § 19.04. MANSLAUGHTER. (a) A person commits an offense
if he recklessly causes the death of an individual.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the second
degree.

[LawyerCop]

Well, assuming the facts are as outlined, and the officer was driving 98 mph in a 45mph zone without lawful excuse, he is lucky he is not charged with "malignant heart" murder. That is where his conduct displayed a reckless and wanton disregard for human life, he could be charged with murder. Lastly, knowing the department tracks vehicles with GPS, why would any cop take this risk unless there was a really good reason.