Two innocent people killed in police chase

[davereid]

From http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10669184

Two innocent people were killed last night after a car involved in a police chase collided head-on with another vehicle.

The pair - a man, 73, and an elderly woman - were in the car struck by the vehicle, which ran a red light as its driver tried to evade police.

The fleeing driver, thought to be in his 20s, suffered moderate injuries in the smash on one of Christchurch's most notorious street-racing roads.

"Blame for this tragedy lies entirely with this driver," Inspector Malcolm Johnston said.

"He was signalled to stop and he should have stopped.

"He is a disqualified driver and well known to Christchurch police. He could have killed anyone at any stage. I have spoken with the officers involved and they are devastated."

At the scene, North Canterbury police district commander Inspector David Lawry told the Herald: "It's a tragedy for those involved and the families of the deceased."


The chase started after the man's car was clocked at 89km/h on Ferry Rd just after 8pm.

Despite initially slowing down for police, the driver took off and ran the red light at the intersection of Fitzgerald Ave and Gloucester St.

"A person in a vehicle failed to stop" said Mr Lawry. "There was a period of about 30 seconds between police engaging in a pursuit and the crash occurring. The car was not warranted or registered."

The patrol car appeared to be quite a long way behind the other vehicle when it crashed, Mr Lawry said.

Mr Johnston: "Police were duty bound to stop this driver. Travelling at nearly 90km/h along Ferry Rd is a recipe for disaster."

Police make about 2000 pursuits a year, and one in four ends in a crash.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~

There is no doubt that primary responsibility for this crash lies with the driver who fled.

But three things stand out.

The first is that police knew who he was.
The second is, that he was already disqualified but chose to drive anyway.
And the third is that he was doing 90 in a 50 zone before the chase started.

What the hell are we going to do about these morons ?

[Bald Eagle]

Locking them up and throwing away the key would be nice , but very expensive, and unlikely given the propensity for using wet bus tickets displayed by our Judiciary.

A bullet would be more cost effective and no risk of re-offending then.

[scott411]

i think the headline should be

"Two innocent people get killed by Fleeing Driver"

the driver of the car is responsible, not the police who were trying to stop him,

i feel blaming the police for this is like the police trying to blame a speeding motorist for causing them to do a u-turn in front of another vehicle,

[boman]

I have said it before, and will probably say it again.

Rule .303. He won't do it again, and it saves the tax payer a fortune in rehab and care whilst he is locked up.

I will donate the bullet.

:angry:

[red mermaid]

On the 3 points noted, and in particular that they knew who the driver was.

Nowhere in the media piece does it say that this was known at the time of the pursuit. It is highly likely it was found out after the crash as the POS was laying in his damaged car.

[onearmedbandit]

Locking them up and throwing away the key would be nice , but very expensive, and unlikely given the propensity for using wet bus tickets displayed by our Judiciary.

A bullet would be more cost effective and no risk of re-offending then.


I have said it before, and will probably say it again.

Rule .303. He won't do it again, and it saves the tax payer a fortune in rehab and care whilst he is locked up.

I will donate the bullet.

:angry:

Both of these options are kind of like slamming the gate shut after the horse has bolted. I'm not saying that I know what the answer is to stopping this shit from happening, or if it's even possible, but it's plainly obvious regardless of the consequences some people are still willing to run.

[Bikemad]

now lets all pay for the fuckwit to receive counselling and victim support and free health care and legal aid and every other consideration known to man cause he comes from a broken home and his mummy and daddy didnt love him or some such shit...............303 gets my vote

[Gone Burger]

i think the headline should be

"Two innocent people get killed by Fleeing Driver"

the driver of the car is responsible, not the police who were trying to stop him,

i feel blaming the police for this is like the police trying to blame a speeding motorist for causing them to do a u-turn in front of another vehicle,

I actually agree. What are the Police supposed to do? Let every driver that they think is a risk get away every time without even attemting to pull them over? THEN how many accidents would there be? Its a tragic outcome indeed, but once again, if the driver hadn't fled police the outcome may have been different.

[Grasshopperus]

If I lived in Chch I'd go down to that hospital and yell obscenities at him right now.

[Marknz]

The media need to be taken to task over this one, and all the other reporting they get wrong.

[Forest]

The car was not warranted, not registered, and driven by an disqualified driver.

I don't think that the answer to this situation is to impose more laws - the laws we currently have did not stop this scrote from getting in his car and killing two innocent bystanders.

If it was up to me, I'd simply disconnect all the machines in the intensive care ward and let nature take care of things. But I'd settle for manslaughter charges.

[avgas]

Cut of his right foot - just above the ankle.
The accelerator will be the least of his problems.

[BoristheBiter]

From http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10669184

Two innocent people were killed last night after a car involved in a police chase collided head-on with another vehicle.

The pair - a man, 73, and an elderly woman - were in the car struck by the vehicle, which ran a red light as its driver tried to evade police.

The fleeing driver, thought to be in his 20s, suffered moderate injuries in the smash on one of Christchurch's most notorious street-racing roads.

"Blame for this tragedy lies entirely with this driver," Inspector Malcolm Johnston said.

"He was signalled to stop and he should have stopped.

"He is a disqualified driver and well known to Christchurch police. He could have killed anyone at any stage. I have spoken with the officers involved and they are devastated."

At the scene, North Canterbury police district commander Inspector David Lawry told the Herald: "It's a tragedy for those involved and the families of the deceased."


The chase started after the man's car was clocked at 89km/h on Ferry Rd just after 8pm.

Despite initially slowing down for police, the driver took off and ran the red light at the intersection of Fitzgerald Ave and Gloucester St.

"A person in a vehicle failed to stop" said Mr Lawry. "There was a period of about 30 seconds between police engaging in a pursuit and the crash occurring. The car was not warranted or registered."

The patrol car appeared to be quite a long way behind the other vehicle when it crashed, Mr Lawry said.

Mr Johnston: "Police were duty bound to stop this driver. Travelling at nearly 90km/h along Ferry Rd is a recipe for disaster."

Police make about 2000 pursuits a year, and one in four ends in a crash.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~

There is no doubt that primary responsibility for this crash lies with the driver who fled.

But three things stand out.

The first is that police knew who he was.
The second is, that he was already disqualified but chose to drive anyway.
And the third is that he was doing 90 in a 50 zone before the chase started.

What the hell are we going to do about these morons ?

three things that stand out about your post.
1) the only responsibility lies with the driver.
2) they did't know who he was till after he crashed, they only knew the car.
3) you just like bagging cops with a side order of troll.

[Clockwork]

Apparently this bring the total deaths attributed to "fleeing" drivers to 13 this year.

I've said it before in another thread but I think the root of the problem stems from the penalties and powers given to the Police by politicians to "make our roads safer". In doing so the Government "upped the Ante" and made flight a more likely outcome.

I'm not blaming the Police, I believe that they are in a no-win situation.

[boman]

Cut of his right foot - just above the ankle.
The accelerator will be the least of his problems.

Cut his foot off just below the neck. No more drain on society.

[Pixie]

What's a couple of deaths if it means you temporarily get an unlicensed driver off the road.
Small price to pay

[JimO]

What's a couple of deaths if it means you temporarily get an unlicensed drive off the road.
Small price to pay

so its the cops fault??? is that what your saying

[Pixie]

so its the cops fault??? is that what your saying

I think it's your subconscious trying to tell you something

[Paul in NZ]

What are we going to do? HTFU is what... Probably 80% of the crime is committed by a very very small number of people... Yeah sure, we all make mistakes etc etc but 2 people are dead..

I dunno - is there a fair way to execute someone for stupidity...

[Forest]

What's a couple of deaths if it means you temporarily get an unlicensed driver off the road.
Small price to pay

He was a disqualified driver, not simply unlicensed.

His license was taken away from him to stop him from driving.

[Banditbandit]

He was a disqualified driver, not simply unlicensed.

His license was taken away from him to stop him from driving.

Since when did removing a small plastic card stop anyone driving? Chopping off his right foot wouild at least make it a bit more difficult ..

[meteor]

The failing to stop charge is seen as an administrative offence allowing other actions to take place and is generally chucked by the system [prosecutors, lawyers or the judge] in favour of negotiating a plea or proceeding on substantive offences i.e. reckless driving, unlawful taking etc. What imho needs to happen is the failing to stop charge IS treated as a stand alone substantive offence. And it should carry mandatory minimums of vehicle confiscation (if owned) and time inside. The penalty needs to be severe enough to deter the act. Otherwise known as sensible sentencing.

Maybe we could have a referendum... lobby parliament... like we did for MMP, alcohol etc!

No we'll just have to wait for that silly bitch that heads the IPCA to find it was the police's fault... again.

[NinjaNanna]

All of this can be easily and cheaply fixed by technology, simply add to the cars ECU the following parameters:


Require an electronic license to be inserted in order to drive the vehicle
Allow the police to remotely shutdown the vehicle
disable the vehicle if it doesn't have current registration and WOF
Signal to any passing police vehicle if it has been tampered with


Sure some will still be able to hack the system, but the vast majority of undesireables would be disabled.

Simple to implement it just requires the political will to implement effective change.

If the general population had any sort of vision we could virtually eliminate this problem inside of 10years, even sooner if they were willing to retro fit a computer to older vehicles.

[Marmoot]

1. I find it ironic how some people here are baying for blood and put out comments such as "cut his foot off just below his neck" etc, while at the same time there are threads here about Islamisation and how many laughed at the news where Saudi court asked doctors to permanently-paralyse a criminal to punish him for what he did to a victim.
P.S. Not saying anything. Just saying it's ironic. That's all.

2. The more we talk about police chase, the more some would think the police would stop chasing "if they go fast enough". The more things would happen.
Sad, but true.

[phill-k]

All of this can be easily and cheaply fixed by technology, simply add to the cars ECU the following parameters:


Require an electronic license to be inserted in order to drive the vehicle
Allow the police to remotely shutdown the vehicle
disable the vehicle if it doesn't have current registration and WOF
Signal to any passing police vehicle if it has been tampered with


Sure some will still be able to hack the system, but the vast majority of undesireables would be disabled.

Simple to implement it just requires the political will to implement effective change.

If the general population had any sort of vision we could virtually eliminate this problem inside of 10years, even sooner if they were willing to retro fit a computer to older vehicles.

Can't agree with this, a real intrusion into the privacy of Joe Citizen.

We have adequate laws to deal with this sort of crime - end result Manslaughter or some such the real issue lies with those that enforce the penalties for these crimes - The courts.

Until our judiciary wake up and see that the Police are being placed in an unenviable situation and hand down judgements that actually create a deterrence, penalties that make such people realise the the consequences are two great these situations will continue.

Removal of property - the car regardless of ownership - incarceration - other loss of liberty or assets.

["D" FZ1]

And now the "Oxygen Thief" is in Intensive Care costing the Tax Payer lots of money :angry:

[marty]

Having pre-existing conditions (disqualified/unlicensed/no wof etc) should immediately ramp up the charge - a bit like the difference between state and federal charges in the US, or in NZ - where burglary without a weapon is just burglary, but with a weapon it straight away becomes aggravated burglary and ups the penalty significantly.

At the moment, killing people in a car while committing another offence (like failing to stop) immediately begins a homicide investigation, however for the most part it will bring a reckless/dangerous causing death charge - the manslaughter charge should be laid, and it then be a question of law as to the conviction on the lower charge.

[onearmedbandit]

All of this can be easily and cheaply fixed by technology, simply add to the cars ECU the following parameters:


Require an electronic license to be inserted in order to drive the vehicle
Allow the police to remotely shutdown the vehicle
disable the vehicle if it doesn't have current registration and WOF
Signal to any passing police vehicle if it has been tampered with


Sure some will still be able to hack the system, but the vast majority of undesireables would be disabled.

Simple to implement it just requires the political will to implement effective change.

If the general population had any sort of vision we could virtually eliminate this problem inside of 10years, even sooner if they were willing to retro fit a computer to older vehicles.

Cheaply? To retro-fit all the cars currently on the road? And what about those cars that don't actually have ECU's? How do you disable them?

[Edbear]

I actually agree. What are the Police supposed to do? Let every driver that they think is a risk get away every time without even attemting to pull them over? THEN how many accidents would there be? Its a tragic outcome indeed, but once again, if the driver hadn't fled police the outcome may have been different.


The car was not warranted, not registered, and driven by an disqualified driver.

I don't think that the answer to this situation is to impose more laws - the laws we currently have did not stop this scrote from getting in his car and killing two innocent bystanders.

If it was up to me, I'd simply disconnect all the machines in the intensive care ward and let nature take care of things. But I'd settle for manslaughter charges.


He was a disqualified driver, not simply unlicensed.

His license was taken away from him to stop him from driving.


Can't agree with this, a real intrusion into the privacy of Joe Citizen.

We have adequate laws to deal with this sort of crime - end result Manslaughter or some such the real issue lies with those that enforce the penalties for these crimes - The courts.

Until our judiciary wake up and see that the Police are being placed in an unenviable situation and hand down judgements that actually create a deterrence, penalties that make such people realise the the consequences are two great these situations will continue.

Removal of property - the car regardless of ownership - incarceration - other loss of liberty or assets.


Having pre-existing condictions (disqualified/unlicensed/no wof etc) should immediately ramp up the charge - a bit like the difference between state and federal charges in the US, or in NZ - where burglary without a weapon is just burglary, but with a weapon it straight away becomes aggravated burglary and ups the penalty significantly.

At the moment, killing people in a car while committing another offence (like failing to stop) immediately begins a homocide investigation, however for the most part it will bring a reckless/dangerous causing death charge - the manslaughter charge should be laid, and it then be a question of law as to the conviction on the lower charge.

These members speak sense, well, maybe not the disconnecting the life support bit, but...

These morons do not care about any laws and will continue to do as they please until they are stopped. Last night on Motorway Patrol the Police attended an accident scene. What did they find? The driver with a head injury from snapping a light pole and crashing into a tree. He was drunk, blew over 700. No surprise there, but he'd lost his licence the day before after blowing over 800 and shouldn't have been driving at all, let alone drunk! As the Cop said about the light pole, "That could have been your loved one!"

The US system of upgradable charges begining with Vehicular Manslaughter should be used here along with the 3 degrees of murder. Automatic charge of manslaughter in any case. Any Police on here who could tell us why he couldn't be charged with manslaughter anyway?

[slofox]

This guy was on RNZ this morning...about 1.01 into the clip.

http://static.radionz.net.nz/assets/audio_item/0006/2389047/mnr-20100827-0805-NZ_police_pursuit_policy_lagging_20_years_-_US_expert-m048.asx

[p.dath]

All of this can be easily and cheaply fixed by technology, simply add to the cars ECU the following parameters:


Require an electronic license to be inserted in order to drive the vehicle
Allow the police to remotely shutdown the vehicle
disable the vehicle if it doesn't have current registration and WOF
Signal to any passing police vehicle if it has been tampered with



This would not be cheap. It would be incredibly expensive. I could easily see costs of $5k to retrofit the car. Can you imagine how expensive the back end system would be just to track it. Easily over $100 million.

[marty]

These members speak sense, well, maybe not the disconnecting the life support bit, but...

These morons do not care about any laws and will continue to do as they please until they are stopped. Last night on Motorway Patrol the Police attended an accident scene. What did they find? The driver with a head injury from snapping a light pole and crashing into a tree. He was drunk, blew over 700. No surprise there, but he'd lost his licence the day before after blowing over 800 and shouldn't have been driving at all, let alone drunk! As the Cop said about the light pole, "That could have been your loved one!"

The US system of upgradable charges begining with Vehicular Manslaughter should be used here along with the 3 degrees of murder. Automatic charge of manslaughter in any case. Any Police on here who could tell us why he couldn't be charged with manslaughter anyway?

vehiclular manslaughter is really just a way of saying 'reckless causing death'. Have a read of this> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM329311.html?search=qs_act_murder_resel&p=1 to see why manslaughter is not often bought to the courts for autocide. Click the *next* button to see further sections about manslaughter

As far as I see, simply bumping penalty up with each aggravating instance would result in 'life' being given for - say - 'aggravated reckless driving causing death', instead of the current 3 years prison for 'aggravated careless causing death', or 5 years for 'dangerous/reckless causing death' (there is no current charge of 'aggravated dangerous/reckless causing death')

[pete376403]

If the guy was "well known to the Police" is it too much to assume the police knew where he lived? If the police hadn't gone into pursuit mode, but instead backed off, would the guy have run the red? Couldn't they then just turn up at his house later?

Not in any way trying to excuse the driver, and if HE had died in the pursuit I would be saying well too bad, but taking out two innocents - is that really worth it?

[marty]

This would not be cheap. It would be incredibly expensive. I could easily see costs of $5k to retrofit the car. Can you imagine how expensive the back end system would be just to track it. Easily over $100 million.

Really? card reader - $200. Installation - $200. Chipped driver's licence - $25. Compulsory @ WOF time - 2 minutes added to your WOF inspection.

Numbers and statistics made up on the internet? Most of them.

[Edbear]

vehiclular manslaughter is really just a way of saying 'reckless causing death'. Have a read of this> http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM329311.html?search=qs_act_murder_resel&p=1 to see why manslaughter is not often bought to the courts for autocide. Click the *next* button to see further sections about manslaughter

As far as I see, simply bumping penalty up with each aggravating instance would result in 'life' being given for - say - 'aggravated reckless driving causing death', instead of the current 3 years prison for 'aggravated careless causing death', or 5 years for 'dangerous/reckless causing death' (there is no current charge of 'aggravated dangerous/reckless causing death')

This bit is interesting about the definition of Murder...

(d) if the offender for any unlawful object does an act that he knows to be likely to cause death, and thereby kills any person, though he may have desired that his object should be effected without hurting any one.


90km/h through a stop sign..?

[marty]

If the guy was "well known to the Police" is it too much to assume the police knew where he lived? If the police hadn't gone into pursuit mode, but instead backed off, would the guy have run the red? Couldn't they then just turn up at his house later?

Not in any way trying to excuse the driver, and if HE had died in the pursuit I would be saying well too bad, but taking out two innocents - is that really worth it?

1. If he's known to the Police, it's likely he's of NFA.
2. I'd say they only found out who he was after he crashed.
3. He was doing 90-odd down Ferry Rd. If the Police saw him, said oh it's blah blah - we'll go and get him later - he subsequently crashed anyway and killed someone - who would be comfortable with THAT outcome?

[marty]

This bit is interesting about the definition of Murder...

(d) if the offender for any unlawful object does an act that he knows to be likely to cause death, and thereby kills any person, though he may have desired that his object should be effected without hurting any one.


90km/h through a stop sign..?

Proving that driving through a stop sign is LIKELY to cause death is the problem. It is definately a possibility, but is likely ? I don't think so.

[munster]

Cars need to be treated just like firearms. Given this fuckwit was already disqualified, who lent or sold him a car?

If I lend you one of my rifles, I have to see your firearms licence, if I don't there are huge fines, jail time and loss of firearms licence for life.

Cars should be no different. Those who assist disqualified drivers by the provision of said vehicles are just as guilty of the outcome and should be charged as such.

[Edbear]

Proving that driving through a stop sign is LIKELY to cause death is the problem. It is definately a possibility, but is likely ? I don't think so.

Point taken. I thought this also interesting and means that he could be charged with Culpable Homicide.

160 Culpable homicide
(1) Homicide may be either culpable or not culpable.

(2) Homicide is culpable when it consists in the killing of any person—

(a) by an unlawful act; or

(b) by an omission without lawful excuse to perform or observe any legal duty; or

(c) by both combined; or

(d) by causing that person by threats or fear of violence, or by deception, to do an act which causes his death; or

(e) by wilfully frightening a child under the age of 16 years or a sick person.

(3) Except as provided in section 178, culpable homicide is either murder or manslaughter.

(4) Homicide that is not culpable is not an offence.

Compare: 1908 No 32 s 175

[BoristheBiter]

Looking at the points above from Marty & edbear this should come under the 3 strikes act.
also as above its about time you needed a licence to buy a car or bike.

And for all you saying they should have just let him go, on ZB this morning they said that the cops pulled up behide him and as the lights turned green they put their lights on to make the stop to which the driver took off and ran the next set and crashed.
how do they know some one will run untill they go to stop them?

maybe we just put cameras in all the cars and at the end of a shift they download the footage and send a ticket to the registed owner.

[marty]

Absolutely. The means of charging someone with Manslaugther is already there, and it is definately used on occasion. I'm simply advocating a stepped penalty rate specific to driving offences.

[marty]

maybe we just put cameras in all the cars and at the end of a shift they download the footage and send a ticket to the registed owner.



Why not just have 100s of cameras on the roadside and send tickets out? Why have them in cars if you're not going to do anything about it?

[Edbear]

Absolutely. The means of charging someone with Manslaugther is already there, and it is definately used on occasion. I'm simply advocating a stepped penalty rate specific to driving offences.

That's why I mentioned the 3 degrees of murder as in the US, I agree. However even without that, if the courts would seek to lay the heaviest charges available now and bring down judgements on the top end of the scale rather than the lowest charge they can, it might make a difference.

[BoristheBiter]

Why not just have 100s of cameras on the roadside and send tickets out? Why have them in cars if you're not going to do anything about it?

I was being factious.

[thehovel]

In Chch there are gangs with prospects who are keen to prove them selfs. Let them have a accident real close to any driver that kills an innocent while fleeing the police. I wouldn't have a problem with it being fatal. Afterall he is 20 just at the begining of his killing spree. We would prefer that he doesn't reoffend. Regards Richard

[rustic101]

Firstly; condolences to the family and friends of the innocent victims. A needless death.

Sadly, and I bet most will want to give me a serve; the Police are just as culpable as the Offender is. I am not nor have I ever been a fan of Pursuits.

Greg O'Conner representing the Association and Paula Rose representing Road Policing will always deflect blame as much as they can. This was evident in the message the Area Commander Insp Johnston was stating, in fact over stating, in the news today.

Yes the Offender drove while disqualified (only established after the fact), had exceeded the posted speed limit by 30kph, failed to stop, Fled Police, then crashed, causing death and injury.

Police are consistently exaggerating facts. Most pursuits are not pursuits but rather ‘fails to stop’. The Pursuit Policy is very clear on this fact, yet over 76% of all recorded pursuits are not Pursuits at all. Whether it’s an 80 male driver doing 35kph and not stopping because he is not aware he is being requested to stop as he believes he could not have done anything wrong, to individuals who do not want to stop immediately until they feel safe to pull over due to roading conditions the likes of stopping on the harbour bridge or Newmarket flyover etc. Regardless most field staff call this a pursuit.

What’s the reason for initiating a Pursuit? If it is someone who fails to give way vs someone brandishing a weapon out of a vehicle? The actual issue happens with the pursuing driver, the red and blues go on the sirens blaring away and the foot hits the floor as hard as it can. The vision of the pursuing individual narrows and so too does the rational thinking. Bear in mind this happens in a very very short pace of time.

Even with Comms controlling the Pursuit the pursuing individuals fail to accept of understand the actual risks they are putting the Offender, themselves and other innocent people at. Other factors in this are that more and more pursuits are not being called in, and pursuing individuals are failing to acknowledge Comms, more so if they abandon the Pursuit.

The Justice system also needs to put up their hand as they are consistently slapping these naughty people on the hand up when sentencing Offenders after they have been involved in a pursuit. There is almost an incentive to give it a crack and get away.

There has to be a better way. Even though I dislike Pursuits I feel there is a genuine need, but only under certain criteria.

[Indoo]

Sadly, and I bet most will want to give me a serve; the Police are just as culpable as the Offender is. .

How so?


yet over 76% of all recorded pursuits are not Pursuits at all

Wheres your source for that very interesting figure?

This crash would still have happened more likely than not even had the Police pulled out of the pursuit almost immediately, this twat was not going to slow down or obey traffic lights just cos he couldn't see a Police car right behind him he's still going to go hell for leather till hes miles away. All not pursuing will do is encourage more of these idiots to do a runner and endanger more innocent people.

[rustic101]

How so?
Wheres your source for that very interesting figure?.

Unfortunately I'm not going to divulge the source however believe me its true.

[Bald Eagle]

The red mist comes when the lights and siren goes on. Having experienced it first hand it is a very real phenomena and one which many of our young Police lack the maturity to recognize and control.

There are very few situations that justify high speed pursuit, the direct risk and danger must be greater than the risk to innocent public of the pursuit, sadly this is seldom the case.

Modern comms and airborne resources and information sources render actual direct pursuit unjustifiable in the majority of case imho.

[NinjaNanna]

Can't agree with this, a real intrusion into the privacy of Joe Citizen.

We have adequate laws to deal with this sort of crime - end result Manslaughter or some such the real issue lies with those that enforce the penalties for these crimes - The courts.

Until our judiciary wake up and see that the Police are being placed in an unenviable situation and hand down judgements that actually create a deterrence, penalties that make such people realise the the consequences are two great these situations will continue.

Removal of property - the car regardless of ownership - incarceration - other loss of liberty or assets.

Sure the laws might be there and adequete if we as a society were willing to pay for their enforcement. You blame the judiciary but I think that's unfair, the judiciary can only send a limited number of criminals to jail simply because there are limited places.

There are only 2 ways to address this, spend considerably more on building and running prisons or spend considerably less on housing each prisoner so the budget can stretch further.

The other obvious approach is prevention by deterent. We could start with any vehicle driven on the road without a valid WOF or Registration is automatically impounded for 1month, and vehicle driven on the road without both a WOF and REGO is automatically crushed.

Any vehicle driven by a 2 time drink driving offender is automatically crushed regardless of ownership.

Any vehicle driven by a driver without a valid license is automatically impounded. If the driver is pulled over for a driving infraction then the vehicle is automatically crushed regardless of ownership.

Any driver that fails to stop under these new laws receives and automatic minimum jail term of 1 month.

Zero tolerance approach with limited cost to the state for enforcement.


So what would you prefer, heavy handed law and penalty or a little black box in the car that prevents the offences in the first place?

OR of course we could leave things exactly as they are, because no one has the balls to take the drastic measures that are required to fix our problem.

[NinjaNanna]

Really? card reader - $200. Installation - $200. Chipped driver's licence - $25. Compulsory @ WOF time - 2 minutes added to your WOF inspection.

Numbers and statistics made up on the internet? Most of them.


Exactly shouldn't be difficult or expensive. Most cars these days have an immobiliser linked to the central locking, shouldn't be hard to piggy back a black box on this to disable the ignition.

Award the development to a local kiwi software developer and electronics company. Shit, could probably build it from a smart phone.

[JimO]

Modern comms and airborne resources and information sources render actual direct pursuit unjustifiable in the majority of case imho.

i think you will find that most of the country doesnt have airbourne resources. The blame for these latest deaths rest soley with the driver of the car........hopefully he will die as well

[Motu]

These young idiots should get bikes - at least us motorcyclists can do a runner safely and get away with it.

[schrodingers cat]

Both of these options are kind of like slamming the gate shut after the horse has bolted. I'm not saying that I know what the answer is to stopping this shit from happening, or if it's even possible, but it's plainly obvious regardless of the consequences some people are still willing to run.

At least with the .303 option the genetic thread is broken...

[willytheekid]

Those poor people :weep:...and the poor bloody cops involved, bet they are still suffering from watching that horrific scene unfold in front of them.
Couldn't believe the media spin on this either....the bastards should be supporting the cops...not the crim's!

Once again, innocent lives cut short due to some ignorant piece of shit...R.I.P our thoughts go out to their freinds and family

[MadDuck]

The red mist comes when the lights and siren goes on. Having experienced it first hand it is a very real phenomena and one which many of our young Police lack the maturity to recognize and control.

Were they young officers? I maybe missed that. It seems to me they are devastated about the whole incident which evolved within seconds.

[marty]

The red mist comes when the lights and siren goes on. Having experienced it first hand it is a very real phenomena and one which many of our young Police lack the maturity to recognize and control.

Nice comment - how do you suggest this doesn't happen?


There are very few situations that justify high speed pursuit, the direct risk and danger must be greater than the risk to innocent public of the pursuit, sadly this is seldom the case.

This does not appear to be a high speed pursuit. The events seem to have happened from a standing start


Modern comms and airborne resources and information sources render actual direct pursuit unjustifiable in the majority of case imho.

Auckland has the only helicopter operated by Police.


.........................

[davereid]

The other obvious approach is prevention by deterent. We could start with any vehicle driven on the road without a valid WOF or Registration is automatically impounded for 1month, and vehicle driven on the road without both a WOF and REGO is automatically crushed.Any vehicle driven by a 2 time drink driving offender is automatically crushed regardless of ownership.Any vehicle driven by a driver without a valid license is automatically impounded. If the driver is pulled over for a driving infraction then the vehicle is automatically crushed regardless of ownership.Any driver that fails to stop under these new laws receives and automatic minimum jail term of 1 month.


Its likely that our increased passion for heavy sentences is the cause of our current problems rather than the solution.

When stopping for a cop meant a Traffic Offence Notice, and a resulting (painful, but not debilitating) fine, virtually everyone stopped.

But when car impounding, roadside loss of licence, and massive fines arrived, the pain associated with stopping meant that fleeing seemed to be a viable option.

This built on itself. Young men soon established amongst themselves a "database" of successful escapes. Each of which was a serious win, as they still had their car, licence and a bundle of cash that they would not have had if they had stopped.

Our strict laws are the motive for bullet-proof young men to flee.

[JimO]

I

Our strict laws are the motive for bullet-proof young men to flee.

perhaps we should find out if they really are bulletproof

[BoristheBiter]

Its likely that our increased passion for heavy sentences is the cause of our current problems rather than the solution.

When stopping for a cop meant a Traffic Offence Notice, and a resulting (painful, but not debilitating) fine, virtually everyone stopped.

But when car impounding, roadside loss of licence, and massive fines arrived, the pain associated with stopping meant that fleeing seemed to be a viable option.

This built on itself. Young men soon established amongst themselves a "database" of successful escapes. Each of which was a serious win, as they still had their car, licence and a bundle of cash that they would not have had if they had stopped.

Our strict laws are the motive for bullet-proof young men to flee.

well if they paid the fines the peniltys wouldn't have to go up.
it was the drivers fault plain and simple.
no one made him drive. no one made him run. no one made him run through a red light.

all you lot sit on here and go on about, speed laws this, speed laws that so it has become accepetable to break the speed laws and try and get out of tickets, and with the hippy arsed do gooders letting these little fucks off it is no wonder it has got to this stage.

[Edbear]

well if they paid the fines the peniltys wouldn't have to go up.
it was the drivers fault plain and simple.
no one made him drive. no one made him run. no one made him run through a red light.

all you lot sit on here and go on about, speed laws this, speed laws that so it has become accepetable to break the speed laws and try and get out of tickets, and with the hippy arsed do gooders letting these little fucks off it is no wonder it has got to this stage.

Surely you're not suggesting people take responsibility for their actions....!!!!!! :gob:

[oldrider]

Two old people keeping themselves fit and low cost to the taxpayer are killed by a young high maintenance criminal deadbeat! :angry:

And it's the "cops fault" for even thinking about chasing the deadbeat? FFS! :sick:

Hello New Zealand..........time to get "real"! :doh:

[JimO]

Two old people keeping themselves fit and low cost to the taxpayer are killed by a young high maintenance criminal deadbeat! :angry:

And it's the "cops fault" for even thinking about chasing the deadbeat? FFS! :sick:

Hello New Zealand..........time to get "real"! :doh:

he knows what he's talking about

[NinjaNanna]

Its likely that our increased passion for heavy sentences is the cause of our current problems rather than the solution.

When stopping for a cop meant a Traffic Offence Notice, and a resulting (painful, but not debilitating) fine, virtually everyone stopped.

But when car impounding, roadside loss of licence, and massive fines arrived, the pain associated with stopping meant that fleeing seemed to be a viable option.

This built on itself. Young men soon established amongst themselves a "database" of successful escapes. Each of which was a serious win, as they still had their car, licence and a bundle of cash that they would not have had if they had stopped.

Our strict laws are the motive for bullet-proof young men to flee.

I don't agree, the heavy fines and penalties came about because we got fed up with repeat offenders.

Why were there repeat offenders if everything was as civilised as you like to recall? Simple answer is because cheap fines were exactly the same as the slaps on the wrist with wet bus tickets we continue to complain about today.

To me, the root of societies problems are quite clear, they stem from a complete lack of respect for authority. Until we as a society face up to this problem we will continue our downward spiral.

I for one don't care whether citizens respect authority out of fear of the consequences or respect it for the benefits it delivers to all. The result is the same, a safe society were people don't have to fear being mown down by criminals in cars.

[Genie]

I see that the Sensible Sentencing people are calling for the driver to be charged with murder!

I agree.


This country needs to stop talking shit and start showing young people that they will be held accountable for their actions.

[p.dath]

Really? card reader - $200. Installation - $200. Chipped driver's licence - $25. Compulsory @ WOF time - 2 minutes added to your WOF inspection.

Numbers and statistics made up on the internet? Most of them.

You have to be kidding. How much do you think it would cost to pass the law through parliament just on it's own? Maybe $250k. Probably closer to a million or two as it would have to go through select committee.

What about the back end system to managed the chipped cards? Most Government departments can't implement major computer systems changes for less than $50 million.

How many people do you think it would take to manage all these cards, the associated back end systems, interfacing with the justice department, etc? Maybe 200 or 300 people to cope with all the licences. That's about 10 million to 20 million a year in just wages.

How is the card reader in the card going to check into the back end system to see if the drivers card has been blocked?

Do you really think you can integrate a card reader system and associated electronics into the vehicles ECU for just $200? I doubt it. What about new car warranties? Who would pick up the cost of all the warranties that are invalidated because someone messed with the vehicles ECU?

[flyingcrocodile46]

Can't keep blaming the cops for all these events. Policing by way of just letting criminals go free if they choose to be even bigger criminals by running from the cops isn't going to work.

IMO a big deterrent is required.

Run from the cops = lose your vehicle, lose your licence 2 years, and go to jail for 6 months.

Would you risk running if that was the penalty?

[p.dath]

Can't keep blaming the cops for all these events. Policing by way of just letting criminals go free if they choose to be even bigger criminals by running from the cops isn't going to work.

IMO a big deterrent is required.

Run from the cops = lose your vehicle, lose your licence 2 years, and go to jail for 6 months.

Would you risk running if that was the penalty?

You would if you have nothing to loose.
e,g. Not your car (stolen perhaps). You've already lost your licence. You're already on bail or wanted for a custodial sentence.

[flyingcrocodile46]

You would if you have nothing to loose.
e,g. Not your car (stolen perhaps). You've already lost your licence. You're already on bail or wanted for a custodial sentence.

If you are so "loose" that you're driving a stolen car without a licence while on bail or on the run from the law for previous crimes. chances are you are such a fuck up that you couldn't give a fuck about anything and no amount of deterrent (short of the death penalty) will make a difference. People that fucked up can't be helped, they become permanent burdens on society.

You can't expect to find answers to 100% of problems of this nature. You can only legislate for sane people.

A strong enough deterrent would likely stop more than half of these types of deaths and should be applied.

[marty]

You have to be kidding. How much do you think it would cost to pass the law through parliament just on it's own? Maybe $250k. Probably closer to a million or two as it would have to go through select committee.

What about the back end system to managed the chipped cards? Most Government departments can't implement major computer systems changes for less than $50 million.

How many people do you think it would take to manage all these cards, the associated back end systems, interfacing with the justice department, etc? Maybe 200 or 300 people to cope with all the licences. That's about 10 million to 20 million a year in just wages.

How is the card reader in the card going to check into the back end system to see if the drivers card has been blocked?

Do you really think you can integrate a card reader system and associated electronics into the vehicles ECU for just $200? I doubt it. What about new car warranties? Who would pick up the cost of all the warranties that are invalidated because someone messed with the vehicles ECU?

It's a totally retarded idea, so I don't really give a fuck, but how about you enlighten us anyway?

and you'd pay someone an average of $66k to run the system? Really? 300 people at average $66k each? You obviously work for the govt!

[Patrick]

The failing to stop charge is seen as an administrative offence allowing other actions to take place and is generally chucked by the system [prosecutors, lawyers or the judge] in favour of negotiating a plea or proceeding on substantive offences....

Recent changes - 28 day impoundment for failing to stop and a mandatory cumulative 3 month disqualification (added on top of whatever other disqually one gets...) so they can't be tossed any more....


If the guy was "well known to the Police" /QUOTE]

No where does it say that he was known "at the time." If he was known, then there would not be any pursuit. You would still flick on the lights and siren to try to stop him, don't you think? BUt once he is off, why bother.... THAT is the way it actually is, and has been, for some time..... Pick him up later... and the car too.....

[QUOTE=marty;1129845516]1. If he's known to the Police, it's likely he's of NFA.
2. I'd say they only found out who he was after he crashed.
3. He was doing 90-odd down Ferry Rd. If the Police saw him, said oh it's blah blah - we'll go and get him later - he subsequently crashed anyway and killed someone - who would be comfortable with THAT outcome?

Can't win. Chase and crash - cops fault? Don't chase and he STILL crashes - cops fault for NOT chasing him?

Either way, headlines will still be the same.:shutup:

[NinjaNanna]

You have to be kidding. How much do you think it would cost to pass the law through parliament just on it's own? Maybe $250k. Probably closer to a million or two as it would have to go through select committee.

What about the back end system to managed the chipped cards? Most Government departments can't implement major computer systems changes for less than $50 million.

How many people do you think it would take to manage all these cards, the associated back end systems, interfacing with the justice department, etc? Maybe 200 or 300 people to cope with all the licences. That's about 10 million to 20 million a year in just wages.

How is the card reader in the card going to check into the back end system to see if the drivers card has been blocked?

Do you really think you can integrate a card reader system and associated electronics into the vehicles ECU for just $200? I doubt it. What about new car warranties? Who would pick up the cost of all the warranties that are invalidated because someone messed with the vehicles ECU?

You think like a bureaucrat, designed correctly you don't need a backend system, lose your license the card is physically taken away from you. NO card no drive. Unless you pilfer somebody elses.

WOF time - swipe the box with the testing stations unique wand and hey presto, drivability extended for 6months.

Pay your rego and txt the receipt number to the box and hey presto another 6 months driving.

I never said the system needed to be hack proof - just secure enough that the average Joe couldn't bypass it.

[Edbear]

You think like a bureaucrat, designed correctly you don't need a backend system, lose your license the card is physically taken away from you. NO card no drive. Unless you pilfer somebody elses.

WOF time - swipe the box with the testing stations unique wand and hey presto, drivability extended for 6months.

Pay your rego and txt the receipt number to the box and hey presto another 6 months driving.

I never said the system needed to be hack proof - just secure enough that the average Joe couldn't bypass it.

Still costs, though. How about the Judges just make it not worth while to run? The morons get caught one way or the other so when, not if, they do, throw the bleedin' book at them! Max every sentence possible for endangering the public!

Confiscate the car, permanent loss of licence, as has been discussed here charge of Culpable Homicide is able to be applied and should carry max penalty, (as should murder). Yes, you may still get the odd runner, but you can bet your boots most would take notice. The law has sufficient resources available, but the courts need to step up and say, "Enough is enough!"

[PrincessBandit]

Sadly the media make things worse - nothing like flogging the log over an opportunity to put more pressure on the police to fix things. Old walrus face on the telly the other night really annoyed the daylights out of me going on and on about "so what are the Police going to do about all these pursuits?" (we all know it's their fault for daring to chase these pricks and having their efforts backfire with innocent people paying the ultimate price :rolleyes:)

[oldrider]

I see that the Sensible Sentencing people are calling for the driver to be charged with murder!

I agree.


This country needs to stop talking shit and start showing young people that they will be held accountable for their actions.

Genie is not just a pretty face, well said that girl! :yes:

[SPman]

To me, the root of societies problems are quite clear, they stem from a complete lack of respect for authority. Until we as a society face up to this problem we will continue our downward spiral.
You could ask, WHY, there is a complete lack of respect for authority. I agree, and I think it is increasingly deserved! Those in authority show an increasing lack of connection, empathy, sympathy or even awareness of those they are supposedly in authority over! Society does need to face up to it, but it won't come from the top! People are going to have to seriously rethink their attitudes to what their society should be and how it should be achieved for the betterment of all, but, I don't see that happening any year soon!


I for one don't care whether citizens respect authority out of fear of the consequences or respect it for the benefits it delivers to all. The result is the same, a safe society were people don't have to fear being mown down by criminals in cars. Sorry - the result is not the same, although it may appear to be at a rudimentary glance! Currently, authority is going down the "you will respect us, or, by God, (they always throw in the "by God" bit), you will suffer the consequences, route!!! This appears to be prevalent over most facets of society and works by punishing anybody and everybody, who even attempts to think outside the bounds, set by "the authorities. Unfortunately - all it does is grow a larger and larger pool of simmering resentment, and not just from the "bad" types. Mr and Mrs Joe Average get pulled in and spat out as well - and they grow resentfull - and it spreads throughout society. You would say, that's OK, as long as they do what they are told! Might work for a short time, but, does'nt work in the medium/long run, and creates far more problems than it solves.
EG. Try training a dog by beating it with a stick - creating a regime of fear and punishment. You can do it - but you end up with a dog that, given the slightest chance will turn on you and try and tear your throat out. Compare that with training a dog through reward and encouragement - you end up with a dog that will give his life to protect you.
People are the same - treat them with a bit of respect, acknowledgement that they are reasonably capable and intelligent, encouragement to do what they do best, ie - don't treat everyone as though they are blithering imbiciles, (even though some are), and you will get a lot more out of them, than continually hitting them with more and heavier punishments for more and more minor "offences", treating them like a mushroom crop! You look around you, and all you see is a society that is more and more aggressive - people at each others throats as they fight over the lesser and lesser scraps of power they have over their lives - every one telling every one else what they should be doing, governments treating the people like shit, police trying to turn themselves into an internal army, to "control" the people, all the vast inequalities of the past, which were once, well on the way to being minimised, growing and swelling, like the population....but....I digress
As usual, looking at the comments on here (and, online generally), probably reaveals more about the posters than the subject.....would more laws have stopped this event.....no! Would heavier deterrent sentences have prevented this.......probably not.
Why do these idiots run? - mainly, because they are scared - or arrogant, which is another result of fear! Do the media help - no - because it seems, these days, their job is to push up fear & hysteria levels to heights, unknown - well, a frightened populace is an unthinking populace who can be told what to do and think! The Lawyers daughter who took off from a check point and killed a motorist was certainly not thinking - just a blast of pure fear of what would happen having failed a breath test overriding her sense and kicking in the flight mechanism.
I'm not saying that I know what the answer is to stopping this shit from happening, or if it's even possible
Recent changes - 28 day impoundment for failing to stop and a mandatory cumulative 3 month disqualification (added on top of whatever other disqually one gets...) so they can't be tossed any more.... I don't think this sort of thing can be stopped - reduced, maybe. As, in this case, the guy was already disqualified, I do think there should be more active enforcement of disqualifications. Here, in Perth, there is now a unit, that follows up on disqals, where, if it is suspected the driver is still driving, they stake them out and arrest them if they are caught driving, or attempting to drive. The car is impounded and they are carted off to the lock up, with some hefty fines ensuing and vehicles being forfeited! Would it have helped in this case...probably not....probably...in this particular case, the only thing that would have worked (thanks Jim) would have been an RPG, fired the moment the guy took off!....or .44 soft nosed bullets fired into the tyres!

[Toaster]

I see that the Sensible Sentencing people are calling for the driver to be charged with murder!

I agree.


This country needs to stop talking shit and start showing young people that they will be held accountable for their actions.

Great post.


Dear Government "representatives" elected by the taxpayers:

PUNISHMENT for CRIMES please.

Thankyou,
The voting Taxpayer.

[twinbruva]

Respect needs to be earned and when those at the top ie; cops, judges, lawyers, politicians et al keep getting caught with their hands in the cookie jar (so to speak)....or down someone's pants....or having conflicts of interest...or whatever then nobody is going to respect them or anything they do or say.

Big wigs need to be above reproach. When they are I'll respect them...until then they can go fuck themselves.