Logo

Police Chase Leaves 6 Patrol Cars Wrecked

Six Wrecked Patrol Cars, and the Story the Metal Told

They brought them in on hooks between five and seven in the morning, one after another, and I stood in the bay doorway with a cup of coffee going cold in my hand and counted them as they came. Six patrol cars. In twenty one years running this motor pool, I had never seen six in one night, and I had certainly never seen six from one pursuit.

My name is Glenna Boyer and I am the fleet supervisor for our patrol district. That means I am not a trooper, I have never made a stop in my life, and most of the public has no idea my job exists. I am the person who receives what is left of a vehicle after everyone else is done having an opinion about it.

Here is something people do not know about wrecked cars. They are honest. A car does not have a version of events, it does not have a union representative, it does not have a bad night it is trying to explain, and it does not get defensive when you ask it a question. It has paint transfer, crush patterns, and tire marks, and those things do not change depending on who is asking.

The story everyone was telling by that afternoon was very simple, and it was already on the news. A man had led troopers on a pursuit and had wrecked six patrol cars in the process. That was the sentence. That was the headline in four different places and it was what the department said in its statement, and it was not true.

I knew it was not true by about ten thirty that morning, before I had finished the intake photos on the fourth vehicle, and it took me another eleven weeks to get anybody to look at what I had.

Let me tell you what I actually do when a vehicle comes in. I photograph everything before I touch it. Every panel, every angle, undercarriage, wheel wells. I log the damage in a system that was designed in the nineties for tracking repair costs, and that is the important detail in this whole story, so hold onto it.

That system exists to answer one question, which is how much will this cost to fix. It was never designed to answer the question of what happened. Nobody reads it except me, the parts vendor, and a woman in the county finance office who has never seen a wrecked car in her life.

The first vehicle in was Ro Hasko's. Ro is a twenty six year veteran and his car had a caved in front left quarter, which is exactly what you would expect if he had made contact with the fleeing vehicle. Consistent with the story. I logged it and moved on.

The second and third came in together and that is where it stopped making sense. Two units with matching damage. Not similar. Matching. Rear quarter of one, front bumper and hood of the other, and the paint transfer on both was the same shade of white that every car in our fleet is painted.

That is not a suspect vehicle. A gray sedan does not leave white patrol car paint on a patrol car. Those two units hit each other.

The fourth had almost no impact damage at all and a completely destroyed suspension on the right side, which is what happens when a car leaves the pavement at speed and goes through a ditch. The fifth had gone into a guardrail nose first, and there was no transfer paint on it from any other vehicle.

The sixth was Micah Steed's. Micah is twenty four and had been on the road for about seven months at that point. His car had guardrail damage down the entire passenger side, front to back, which is a very specific pattern that tells you the car was traveling roughly parallel to the barrier when it made contact.

So here is what the metal said, on the first morning, before anybody had asked me anything.

Exactly one of those six vehicles had made contact with the vehicle they were chasing. One. Ro's. Two of them hit each other. One went off the road on its own. Two went into barriers, and at least one of those was avoiding the pileup that the other cars had created behind the suspect.

The man they were chasing did not wreck six patrol cars. The pursuit wrecked itself.

I need to be very clear about something before I go further, because I have had this conversation with people who assume I am building an argument I am not building. Colton Reape ran from a lawful traffic stop at speeds that endangered everybody on that road. He had a warrant, he made his own choices, and he is responsible for them. He is serving time and I think that is correct.

What I am telling you is that the specific claim, the one that made the headline, the one that gets repeated every time these stories run, was manufactured out of an assumption. Six cars were damaged during a pursuit, therefore he damaged six cars. Nobody checked. The metal was sitting in my bay the entire time and nobody checked.

The reason nobody checked is not a conspiracy, and I want to be careful with that too. It is that damage assessment lives in maintenance, and maintenance is a cost center, and cost centers are read by finance people. Crash reconstruction lives in a completely different building and only gets activated for serious injuries or fatalities.

Nobody was seriously hurt that night. Which meant that six vehicles' worth of physical evidence about how a pursuit had actually unfolded went into a repair tracking system, and the safety review went ahead using dashcam video and trooper statements, and those two things never touched each other at any point in the process.

That is the real story here, and it is not exciting, and it is the reason I eventually wrote all of this down.

I raised it, incidentally. Three years earlier. I had noticed that our multi unit pursuits were producing a specific pattern of unit to unit collisions, and I had written it up, and I had submitted it, and it had been filed. Correctly filed. In maintenance, where it belonged, because that is what I am and that is what my reports are.

Nobody in the safety chain ever read it, because why would they. It was a fleet document about repair costs. It had a line item for bumper covers in it. It never occurred to me at the time to send it anywhere else, and it never occurred to anyone else that a woman in coveralls with a clipboard was sitting on three years of pursuit data.

What forced the issue was Micah Steed.

They moved to discipline him. Failure to maintain control of a police vehicle. The proposed finding was that he had lost control and struck a guardrail during a pursuit, causing significant damage to department property, and that finding was going to sit in his file for the rest of his career.

Micah is a quiet kid. He did not fight it. He came into my bay about a week after the pursuit to sign something about the vehicle and he was so obviously miserable that I asked him what had happened, and he told me he did not really know, that it had all been very fast, and that if they said he lost control then he probably lost control.

That sentence bothered me for two days.

So I went back to the photographs. And then I went out to the actual stretch of road, on my own time, on a Saturday, with a tape measure and a camera, because I have been doing this long enough to know what to look for even though it is not officially my job.

The guardrail damage on Micah's car ran front to back down the passenger side in a long continuous scrape. That is a car that was already traveling nearly parallel to the barrier when it contacted it. A car that loses control and strikes a guardrail hits it at an angle and the damage is concentrated, usually with a deformation point.

His car did not do that. His car was steered into that guardrail, deliberately, at a shallow angle, which is the maneuver you make when you have decided that scraping a barrier is the least bad option available to you.

Then I found the scuff marks in the roadway, which had not been photographed by anyone because there was no reconstruction opened, and which had mostly weathered away by the time I got there, and which I photographed anyway.

Here is what happened, and it took Bettina Klose, our reconstruction analyst, about four hours to confirm once somebody finally handed her the material.

Four units were stacked up behind the suspect on a two lane stretch. Two of them came together. Those two spun and blocked most of the roadway. Micah came around the curve into that, and there was a civilian vehicle stopped in the median, a family who had pulled over when they saw the lights coming.

He had two options in roughly a second and a half. He could take the gap on the left, which would have put him into the median and possibly into the family. Or he could put his own car into the guardrail on the right and let the barrier take the energy.

He picked the guardrail.

The kid made the single best decision anybody made that night, and the department was three weeks from putting a failure to maintain control finding in his file for it, because nobody had connected a maintenance photograph to a disciplinary process.

I took everything to Lieutenant Prosper Kean, who is a reasonable man in a difficult position, and his first reaction was not what I hoped for. He told me, correctly, that I am not a crash reconstructionist and that fleet damage assessments are not evidence in a disciplinary proceeding.

He was right about all of that. And he also, to his credit, walked it over to Bettina himself the following morning instead of letting it die, and he did that knowing exactly what it was going to open up.

Because once you establish that Micah did not lose control, you have also established that four other units created a hazard in the roadway. And once you establish that, somebody has to ask why four units were stacked on a two lane road behind one fleeing sedan in the first place.

The answer to that question is culture, and everybody in that building already knew it.

Nobody wants to be the unit that stays back. Nobody wants to be the one who is not there when it ends. There is no rule that says every available car should join a pursuit, and there was no order given that night for four units to converge, and they converged anyway, because that is what everybody does and always has.

That is the part that does not fit in a headline. There was no villain in the department. Ro Hasko is a good trooper. The two units that collided are both good troopers. Nobody did anything malicious and nobody broke a written rule, and six vehicles were destroyed anyway, and a twenty four year old nearly ate a career ending finding for making the right call.

The review changed the pursuit policy. There is now a hard cap on the number of units that may join a pursuit without explicit supervisory authorization, and there is a requirement that additional units stay back at a defined distance rather than closing.

They also, and this is the one I actually care about, connected the fleet damage system to the safety review process. It took eleven months and a software vendor and an amount of money that would embarrass you. Now when a vehicle comes into my bay from a pursuit, my intake photographs and my damage log go into the safety file automatically.

Micah's finding was withdrawn. He is still on the road. He does not talk about it and I do not bring it up, but he brings me coffee about once a month, which is a young man's way of saying something he cannot say.

Colton Reape pled to what he actually did, which was fleeing and eluding, reckless driving, and the underlying warrant. What he did not plead to, because it was not true, was destroying six patrol cars, and the corrected number in the final report is one.

The cost, incidentally, was just under four hundred thousand dollars for the six units, which was most of our replacement budget for that fiscal year. That number went to the county and the county went to the newspaper and the newspaper wrote about the man who cost taxpayers four hundred thousand dollars.

The correction ran eleven weeks later in a much smaller font.

Here is what I have taken from twenty one years of receiving other people's worst nights on a tow hook.

The evidence in almost every one of these situations already exists somewhere. It is very rarely hidden. It is in the wrong department, in a system designed for a different purpose, being read by somebody who is not looking for it, and that is functionally the same as being hidden.

And the story that gets told first is almost never revisited. Six patrol cars wrecked by a fleeing driver is a clean sentence. One patrol car damaged by a fleeing driver and five damaged by the response to him is a complicated sentence, and complicated sentences do not travel.

I am not the hero of this. I nearly did not say anything. I had already filed my report three years earlier and been ignored, and there is a very comfortable place a person can settle into where they have technically done their part. What got me out of that chair was a twenty four year old who assumed that if they said he lost control, he probably lost control.

Do not assume that. Not about yourself, and not about the story you are being handed.

The footage of that pursuit is below. Watch it if you want to. Just know that the video shows you six cars in a line, and it does not show you which one of them touched him, and for eleven weeks nobody thought to ask.

 

Comments (0)

Loading comments...

$1300 Walmart Theft Explodes Into an All Out Brawl
A $1,300 Theft Turned Into a Brawl. I Was Standing Right There, Doing Nothing. I am the woman in the gray polo standing near the registers in that video, watching the whole thing happen and not moving. The comments have opinions about me. Useless. Coward. Probably in on it. Somebody worked out what my job title is and decided that made it worse. I was doing exactly what twelve years of training and one very specific corporate policy required me to do, and the nineteen year old who did move is the one who got hurt, and then got fired, and then got called a hero by people who had no idea she lost her job that same week. My name is Verlie and I work in asset protection at a big box store. I am not going to name the chain. The policy I am about to describe is not unique to any one of them. Let me start with the number in the headline, because it is not random. Thirteen hundred dollars matters because it sits above the felony threshold for retail theft in my state. Under it, in most places, you are looking at a misdemeanor. Over it, the charge changes category entirely, and so does everything downstream, and people who steal for a living know exactly where that line is. The crew that hit us that day knew. They always know. They know the threshold better than most of the officers who respond, and they load carts to a specific value, and they will put something back if the total is climbing past a number they do not want to cross. That is the first thing people get wrong about this. They picture a desperate person taking something they cannot afford. That happens, constantly, and I have handled hundreds of those, and they almost never turn into anything. What was happening that day was not that. It was a boosting operation, which means organized resale, and the man in the video was the disposable end of it. Here is how my job actually works, and this is the part that generates the comments. I cannot touch anyone. I do not mean that as a general principle. I mean it is written down, and it is a fireable offense, and it applies to me even though loss prevention is literally my department. Most large retailers now operate on some version of a non apprehension or hands off policy. Depending on the company it may allow a narrow exception for trained specialists under strict conditions, but the default for the overwhelming majority of staff, including most of us in AP, is observe, document, report, do not engage. People assume that policy exists to protect merchandise. It does not. It exists because a store got sued, or somebody died. An apprehension that goes wrong kills people. A customer who trips. An employee who takes a blow to the head against a tile floor. A subject who has a medical event during a struggle. All of these have happened in this industry, repeatedly, and the settlements are catastrophic, and the human outcomes are worse than the settlements. So the policy is not cowardice. It is a company having done the arithmetic on what a stolen television costs versus what a dead teenager costs, and having reached the only sane conclusion. The trouble is that the policy protects the company and the employee, and it is completely invisible to the customer standing in aisle nine watching a man walk out with two carts. Which brings me to what actually caused the brawl. The thief did not start it. I want that very clear, because the video title says the theft exploded into a fight and the sequence implies the man swung on somebody. Two customers decided to intervene. They were not being malicious. I have thought about this a lot and I believe they were doing what they genuinely thought was right. They saw a man taking thirteen hundred dollars of merchandise past the registers, and they saw a store employee standing there not stopping him, and they filled the gap. One of them got a hand on the cart. The other got in front of the doors. And a man who had been calmly walking out was suddenly a man who was cornered, and cornered people fight, and it went from a theft to a physical altercation in about four seconds. Then more people joined, because that is what happens, and now there were six adults in a scrum in front of a set of automatic doors with a family with a stroller eleven feet away. That is the brawl in the video. It was not created by the theft. It was created by the response to the theft. And I stood there, because if I had gone in, I would have escalated it further and I would have been terminated by the end of the shift, and neither of those things would have gotten the merchandise back. I got on the radio. I called it in with a description that was, and I say this without pride because it is just my job, extremely good. Height, build, clothing, tattoos, the vehicle, the plate, direction of travel. That is the actual work. Then Tansy went in. Tansy Oyelaran was nineteen years old. She had been on registers for about five months. She was small and quick and she had the specific fearlessness that people have at nineteen before anything has ever gone properly wrong for them. She saw two customers getting hit and she came around her lane and she went in, and she got a shoulder into the middle of it, and she took a fall onto the floor with someone's weight on top of her. She broke her wrist. It was a bad break, the kind that needs hardware, and she is left handed and it was her left wrist. The video ends about there. That is where every version of it cuts. Here is what happened after. Store management, meaning Doug Vanhoose, who is not a villain and who I have worked with for six years, did what the policy required him to do, which was to document a violation of the non engagement policy by an associate. Tansy was terminated. It took nine days. She was also, during those same nine days, being called a hero on the internet by about four hundred thousand people who had watched a nineteen year old girl get taken to the floor and thought it was the most inspiring thing they had seen all week. Nobody in those comments knew she had been fired. Nobody in those comments knew she was nineteen with a broken wrist and no income, and that the injury happened in a way the company was arguing fell outside the scope of her duties, which is a sentence I want you to read twice. I want to be careful and fair here, because the easy version of this article makes Doug the villain and the company a monster. The policy that got Tansy fired is the same policy that exists because a different nineteen year old somewhere else got killed doing exactly what she did. It is a bad rule that produces terrible outcomes and it exists because the alternative produced worse ones. Both of those things are true and I have not been able to get them to stop being true no matter how many times I turn them over. What I can say is that the company enforced its policy against a teenager with total consistency and total speed, and has never once, in twelve years, moved with that kind of speed on anything that would have made the store safer. We had asked for a second AP position at that location for three years. We had asked for a door greeter position that was not seasonal. We had asked for the receipt check station to be staffed at closing. All of that costs money, and none of it happened, and a nineteen year old cashier filled the gap with her body and then was terminated for it. Now the part about the man himself. He was identified. My description and the plate did their job, and a detective named Ori Blanchard picked him up about six weeks later on an unrelated stop. He was charged. He was one of at least four people working that operation across a wide area, hitting stores on a rotation, and he was the one who walked in the door, which means he was the one who took all the risk for the smallest cut. The person who organized it, who received the goods, who ran the resale, was never charged with anything. As far as I know that individual is still operating. That is the normal outcome in these cases and every AP professional reading this is nodding right now. We catch the hands. We almost never catch the head. The hands are usually somebody with a substance problem or a debt or a record that makes ordinary employment impossible, and there is an endless supply of them, and the person running it knows that. So the arrest, which felt like the ending, changed nothing about the operation. They hit a store two counties over about a month later. Here is what I would ask of you, and it is the reason I agreed to write any of this. Do not intervene in a retail theft. I know exactly how that sounds coming from a person in a gray polo who stood still. I am asking anyway. You do not know what is in that person's waistband. You do not know whether they are in withdrawal, whether they are armed, whether they will fight like a cornered animal because they are on their third strike. Employees do not know either, which is exactly why we are told not to touch anyone. The merchandise is insured. It genuinely is. Nobody in that building loses their home because a cart went out the door, and no employee's job is contingent on you stopping it, and I promise you that no manager anywhere wants you to get hurt over inventory. What is actually useful is the thing that feels like doing nothing. Get a description. Not a vague one. Height relative to a door frame, build, hair, facial hair, distinguishing marks, what exactly they were wearing including shoes, which people always forget. Shoes are the thing people do not change. Get the vehicle and the plate if you can do it from a safe distance without following anyone. Do not follow anyone. Following is how bystanders end up in parking lot confrontations, and it is the single most common way a witness becomes a victim. And then find an employee and tell them, and give your name. That last one matters more than everything else combined. A theft with a good witness statement is a chargeable case. A theft with grainy overhead footage and nobody willing to be named is a report that goes into a pile. Almost everyone films. Almost nobody gives a name. I have watched twenty people record an incident and had zero of them stay to make a statement, and the video from all twenty phones was worth less to the detective than one person willing to sign something. Tansy is twenty two now. Her wrist works, mostly. There is weather she can feel coming. She works in a veterinary office and she is happier than she was on registers, and she says that without bitterness, and I still cannot say the word hero about her without something happening in my throat. She and I had lunch about a year after. I told her I was sorry that I did not move, and she told me, without any hesitation at all, that she was glad I did not, because if I had gone in it would have been two of us on that floor instead of one. I have thought about that more than almost anything else anyone has said to me in twelve years. So here is the whole thing, as plainly as I can put it. The theft was thirteen hundred dollars and it was going to be thirteen hundred dollars whether anybody moved or not. The brawl was created by people trying to help. The person who actually got hurt was the youngest and lowest paid person in the building, and she was fired for it, and cheered for it, in the same week, by two completely different audiences that never learned about each other. And the man who organized all of it has never spent a night anywhere. The footage is below. Watch it, and watch the timestamps at the doors, and notice that nothing violent happens until the moment somebody decides to be a hero. Full Video