Woman Arrested After Car Chase From Saratoga to Fremont

Deputies with the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday arrested a woman following a vehicle pursuit from Saratoga to Fremont.

Kimberly Matthai, 39, was arrested on suspicion of several crimes including assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer, felony evading and resisting arrest, according to a press release from the sheriff's office.

At 7:53am Thursday, deputies responded to a home on Monte Vista Drive in Saratoga on a report of a suspicious vehicle parked in the driveway.

The caller reported a woman, later identified as Matthai, was wandering around the backyard of the property.

Responding deputies located Matthai and tried to speak with her, but she ran away.

Deputies said she got into her vehicle and rammed a patrol car.

She then led deputies on a pursuit from Saratoga to Fremont.

Deputies were able to use spike strips to immobilize Matthai’s vehicle, and after driving on her car’s rims, Matthai eventually stopped

her vehicle on the Mission Boulevard off-ramp in Fremont, deputies said.

Matthai was taken into custody without further incident, according to the sheriff’s office.

6 Comments

  1. Very lucky woman. Had she been in my backyard she would’ve had a boot up her ass or worse. It’s called trespassing and I would suspect intent to commit burglary. I’m just pleased to see that the deputies actually decided to chase her this time instead of “breaking off of the police pursuit to ensure public safety“.
    We need to stop this insane policy of stopping pursuits. People don’t run from the police because they are Sunday school teachers out for a morning drive.

    Everyone of these people running from the police have something that they are trying to conceal. They are either felons in possession, or aactively running from a crime scene.

    Keep up the great work Deputies and stay safe.

  2. > Deputies with the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday arrested a woman following a vehicle pursuit from Saratoga to Fremont.

    As far as I know, SJPD has a “non-pursuit” policy.

    Candidates to replace the current Police Chief need to be questioned on whether they would change this policy.

  3. The vast majority of “professional” police administrators view non-pursuit policies as evidence of their enlightenment. The risks, they will tell you, are simply not worth the rewards. What they don’t tell you is that the risks they fear the most are for themselves, for should a major injury or death result from a chase their morning routine of coffee and croissants (donuts being too bourgeois) is sure to be ruined by calls from upset politicians and visits from obnoxious reporters.

    For several decades the departments that treated vehicle chases as unreasonably risky had no problems with foot chases (in which their officers, often in the darkness, jumped fences, rounded blind corners, and otherwise exposed themselves to dangers of all sorts). Officers have been shot, assaulted, bitten by dogs, and felled by physical hazards during such chases, but since these chases seldom if ever spoiled a chief’s morning routine they were deemed consistent with the police mission (public safety).

    But now even that’s changing because, wouldn’t you know it, foot chases can sometimes result in the injury or death of some protected class piece-of-garbage, resulting in, you guessed it: ruined mornings. And nothing marks a police chief’s professionalism as much as does avoiding ruined mornings.

    We can delude ourselves from now until the Chinese finally relieve us of our mindlessness-induced misery, but what America really wants in a police chief is someone, preferably non-white and non-heterosexual, who can relieve our minority citizens (excluding Asians) of the burden of suffering consequences for their criminal conduct, no matter how outrageous. Don’t chase ’em, don’t describe ’em over the radio, don’t fight ’em. and, well, best not to even catch ’em. Just get out there and find those damned white supremacists.

  4. Ben Z. You are a classic “useful idiot,” Just like the Russian style. If you don’t like what someone says, your first reaction is to call them insane (the Soviet’s next move was to force them into a gulag). How about providing some fact based rebuttal? Or is that too difficult because you have no idea what you are talking about. You just name call. You also might want to look up the words “sarcasm “ and “satire.”

    There are many legitimate arguments to be made about this issue. Name calling is not one of them.

  5. To Phu Tan Elli: EXCELLENT comment about pursuit policy. And about Police Chiefs who don’t want their morning “coffee and croissants” disturbed while they BS with their other high-ranking buddies and colleagues. Of course, your comments about the perfect candidate for Police Chief are SPOT ON. Finally, your last two sentences sum things up perfectly. Well done!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *