arizona republicwed, november 3, 1999
do people have the right to flee the police?
Court to decide if it's reason enough for stop.
By David G. Savage
Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON - The scene is repeated every day all over the country: A police car turns the corner, and the young men scatter. Some walk away, and some run.
Is their flight so "inherently suspicious" that it justifies the police chasing those who ran?
Or does every American retain the right to run away from the police, so long as there is no other evidence of a crime in progress?
The Supreme Court took up those questions Tuesday.
Clinton administration lawyers and state prosecutors urged the court to give the police broad power to pursue anyone who runs away.
"The normal rule is that innocent people don't flee from the police," Malcolm Stewart, an assistant U.S. solicitor general, said.
But several justices pointed out that a reasonable and innocent person might want to get away from a confrontation be
tween the police and neighborhood drug dealers.
Others, including young Black men, might fear the police because of past, unpleasant encounters.
Walking away from an officer is usually not suspicious, Stewart added, but running is a "panicked reaction" that signals guilt.
The case 'before the court arose when four police cars turned onto a Chicago street known for drug dealing. An officer spotted William Wardlow fleeing down an alley.
He cornered Wardlow, did a "pat down" and found a loaded revolver. Wardlow was arrested.
But a Chicago judge and the Illinois Supreme Court threw out the charge and ruled the police had violated the Fourth Amendment when they chased and detained Wardlow.
In their comments and questions, the justices signaled they were wary of giving the police blanket authority to stop all fleeing persons, or, conversely, to rule that the police can never chase a person who flees.