Death of Jaahnavi Kandula, 23, from India, ignited outrage after fellow officer was recorded making ‘appalling’ remarks about case
Prosecutors in Washington state said on Wednesday they will not file felony charges against a Seattle police officer who struck and killed a graduate student from India while responding to an overdose call – a case that attracted widespread attention after another officer was recorded making callous remarks about it.
Officer Kevin Dave was driving 74mph (119km/h) on a street with a 25mph (40km/h) speed limit in a police SUV before he hit 23-year-old Jaahnavi Kandula in a crosswalk on 23 January 2023.
In a memo to the Seattle police department on Wednesday, the King county prosecutor’s office noted that Dave had on his emergency lights, that other pedestrians reported hearing his siren, and that Kandula appeared to try to run across the intersection after seeing his vehicle approaching. She might also have been wearing wireless earbuds that could have diminished her hearing, they noted.
For those reasons, a felony charge of vehicular homicide was not warranted. “There is insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Officer Dave was consciously disregarding safety,” the memo said.
In a memo to the Seattle police department on Wednesday, the King county prosecutor’s office noted that Dave had on his emergency lights, that other pedestrians reported hearing his siren, and that Kandula appeared to try to run across the intersection after seeing his vehicle approaching. She might also have been wearing wireless earbuds that could have diminished her hearing
It’s possible this was her fault, but there are an awful lot of caveats in there. This looks like a kitchen sink of possible excuses. But also, we should have definitive answers to those questions before deciding not to prosecute, shouldn’t we?
“He might not have been at fault.”
“Oh! Case closed.”
But also, we should have definitive answers to those questions before deciding not to prosecute, shouldn’t we?
Actually not really. There has to be clear evidence of a crime. A bunch of open questions works against prosecuting the case. Remember this would probably eventually end up in a jury trail and you need evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
75 in a 25 is insane and negligent homicide in my opinion but it gets tricky since it was a cop with lights and sirens on.
Striking a pedestrian is evidence of a crime, no matter what. A trial is when the evidence is examined to see if the striker was at fault.
I’d say anyone choosing to drive 74mph in a 25mph zone can be said to have disregarded safety. And if you haven’t realized you are going 74mph in a 25mph zone, you shouldn’t have a license, let alone be an officer.
Also, this was a police officer responding to an overdose call, I doubt he was going to administer medical assistance.
However it should be said that a 25mph road should really be designed as a 25mph road, with suitable traffic calming measures. Far too many low speed limit roads are big and wide open, practically encouraging people to speed.
However it should be said that a 25mph road should really be designed as a 25mph road, with suitable traffic calming measures. Far too many low speed limit roads are big and wide open, practically encouraging people to speed.
Sorry, but this is nonsensical. The wide road did not make that cop drive 75 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone. That officer was responsible for his own actions, and would have found a way to drive at an unsafe speed regardless of how the road was designed.
Hypothetically he would have been forced to go too slow to easily murder anyone with his car. He is a murderer, but traffic engineering works.
