Changes

In '''''Scott v. Harris''''' (2007), <ref>http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/05-1631.ZS.html</ref> the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held in favor of a police officer who terminated a high speed chase by bumping into the suspect's car, causing him to lose control and crash.  The crash rendered him a quadriplegic.  The Court held that the police could not be sued for taking reasonable means to stop someone who was leading the police on a high-speed chase.  The Court, after reviewing a video tape of the chase and crash, rejected that plaintiff's argument that his [[Fourth Amendment]] rights against an unreasonable search and seizure.

In '''''Scott v. Harris''''' (2007),<ref>http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/05-1631.ZS.html</ref> the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held in favor of a police officer who terminated a high speed chase by bumping into the suspect's car, causing him to lose control and crash.  The crash rendered him a quadriplegic.  The Court held that the police could not be sued for taking reasonable means to stop someone who was leading the police on a high-speed chase.  The Court, after reviewing a video tape of the chase and crash, rejected that plaintiff's argument that his [[Fourth Amendment]] rights against an unreasonable search and seizure.

Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote the opinion for the 8-1 Court, with Justice [[John Paul Stevens]] the lone dissent.

Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote the opinion for the 8-1 Court, with Justice [[John Paul Stevens]] the lone dissent.