Driver, Police Tactics—or Both? Who Bears Responsibility for Kevin Stevens’ Death?

What police say happened

At approximately 1:30 a.m. September 5, Bakersfield Police Department Special Enforcement Unit officers were attempting to arrest 21-year-old Isaiah Andrade near Clover Mountain Court and Pine Meadow Drive. Police said Andrade had an active Ramey warrant involving alleged firearm-possession and gang-related offenses, and officers believed he might still have the firearm.

When officers attempted to arrest Andrade, police say he entered the passenger side of a vehicle driven by 20-year-old Gabriel Lopez. Lopez allegedly refused to stop and fled at high speed.

As the vehicle traveled south on Airport Drive, officers deployed spike strips near Olive Drive. Police said Lopez tried to avoid the strips, lost control and struck Stevens on the west sidewalk. Lopez and Andrade allegedly ran from the vehicle but were quickly arrested.

Kern County Sheriff’s Office booking records list Lopez on open allegations including second-degree murder, reckless evading, evading causing injury and conspiracy. Booking allegations are not convictions, and Lopez is presumed innocent unless proved guilty.

The California Highway Patrol is investigating the collision. BPD has separately opened criminal and administrative investigations and classified the pursuit as a critical incident.

The argument that the driver bears responsibility

Those placing responsibility on the driver make a straightforward argument: Lopez allegedly chose to flee. Police did not make the driver accelerate, refuse to stop or steer around the spike strips. Had the vehicle pulled over, the pursuit would have ended and Stevens would almost certainly still be alive.

Supporters of the officers’ decision may also point out that police were not pursuing someone over a minor traffic citation. They were attempting to apprehend a wanted man whom they believed could be armed.

Spike strips are intended to stop or slow a dangerous vehicle. From that perspective, officers were attempting to end the threat—not create another one.

Why police tactics are still being questioned

Others argue that blaming the driver does not answer every question. Police pursuits are inherently dangerous, and officers must make continuing decisions about whether the need for an immediate arrest outweighs the danger created for everyone nearby.

That is not merely an opinion. BPD’s current policy manual says the need to apprehend someone must clearly outweigh the risks to officers and the public. Officers and supervisors are instructed to continually consider speed, traffic, pedestrians, road conditions, time of day, the seriousness of the suspected offense and whether alternatives are available.

The department’s tire-deflation-device policy is particularly relevant. Policy 308.9.1 instructs officers to consider the fleeing vehicle’s speed because higher speeds increase the possibility that a driver will lose control after hitting—or swerving to avoid—a device. It also says officers should consider pedestrian activity, traffic and whether the deployment location creates an increased possibility of a vehicle striking a fixed object.

That warning resembles what police say occurred: The fleeing vehicle reportedly swerved around the strips, lost control and struck Stevens. This does not prove that an officer violated policy. The available information does not establish the exact placement of the strips, whether Stevens was visible to officers, the lighting conditions or whether the area met the policy’s description of a heavily populated pedestrian location.

It does, however, make those questions impossible to dismiss.

Two forms of accountability can exist

Criminal responsibility and departmental accountability are not the same question. A court may determine that the driver is criminally responsible for Stevens’ death. BPD’s internal review must separately determine whether officers followed policy, selected an appropriate deployment location and continually balanced apprehension against public danger.

One finding does not automatically erase the other. Even if officers followed every existing rule, the public can still ask whether those rules adequately protect bystanders. Likewise, even if investigators determine that a different police tactic should have been used, that would not eliminate the driver’s responsibility for allegedly fleeing.

CHP’s statewide 2023 data show why the balance matters. Approximately 19% of reported police pursuits ended in crashes. Those crashes caused 43 deaths, including 13 uninvolved third parties. The figures do not prove what should have happened in this case, but they demonstrate why pursuit decisions receive intense scrutiny.

The evidence the public still needs

Before anyone can reach a fully informed conclusion, BPD and CHP should provide a documented account of the pursuit and deployment decision.

• How fast was the fleeing vehicle traveling?
• How long and how far did the pursuit continue?
• Did a supervisor approve or monitor the spike-strip deployment?
• Where were the strips placed in relation to Stevens, the sidewalk and nearby objects?
• Could officers see Stevens before deploying them?
• Were other intervention methods considered?
• What do dispatch recordings, police video and CHP’s collision reconstruction show?
• Did officers comply with every part of BPD’s pursuit policy?

An administrative investigation is not evidence that officers did something wrong. It is the process intended to answer precisely these questions.

Kevin Stevens was more than part of a debate

Stevens’ aunt, Chanel Stevens, told 23ABC that her nephew was energetic, helpful and attempting to turn his life around. He had contacted his family the day before his death and planned to call again. That call never came.

Kevin Stevens should not be reduced to a talking point in an argument between supporters and critics of law enforcement. The purpose of asking difficult questions should be preventing another uninvolved person—and another family—from suffering the same fate.

What do you think?

Who bears responsibility for Kevin Stevens’ death? Choose the response closest to your view and explain what evidence influenced your opinion.

• The fleeing driver alone.
• Primarily the driver, but police tactics still require review.
• The driver and BPD share meaningful responsibility.
• BPD’s pursuit and spike-strip decisions bear primary responsibility.
• There is not enough public evidence to decide yet.

Disagreement is welcome, but discussion should remain respectful toward Stevens’ family and everyone involved. This debate concerns public policy and community opinion; legal guilt will be determined through the judicial process.

About the image

The accompanying image is an authentic June 7, 2008 photograph of a Bakersfield Police Department patrol cruiser. It is a file image and does not show the September 5 pursuit, fatal crash, Kevin Stevens, either arrested man or any involved officer.

Photographer Defiant15E released the image into the public domain through Wikimedia Commons. It is used as documentary agency context and does not imply endorsement by the photographer, BPD or Wikimedia Commons.