PDA

View Full Version : Whangarei Police chase



Lou Girardin
3rd October 2003, 16:15
The report has just come out into the double fatal where the rider of a Speed triple hit a car while he was being chased.
Typical bloody whitewash, it seems the cops did nothing wrong. Except that the 2nd cop car didn't pull out of the chase when the first car did.
It seems that the 2nd car pulled into the path of the bike which then hit the car the dead girl was in. But apparently that's OK.
It also seems that Police logic says that if you check someone's speed at 147km/h on a straight clear road. It's then OK to chase him for 20+ km's at even higher speeds in order to further 'road safety'.
Policing in NZ has become a f***ing joke.
Lou

marty
3rd October 2003, 16:22
come on lou. what other factors were there? what does the report actually say?

Lou Girardin
3rd October 2003, 16:47
That's basically it. The report said that the speeds reached were 'undesirable', but in the context of the situation, were acceptable. It also said that the Police claim that they had pulled out of the chase was incorrect. Which is also what witnesses to the incident said.
I just don't believe that two dead kids were worth it, for a lousy speeding ticket.
Some people will say that the biker should have stopped, and maybe he should have. But; I know from a lot of personal experience, that after a chase over that distance, with adrenaline pumping, few people are capable of rational thought, including the cops in the chase.
Lou

wkid_one
3rd October 2003, 16:49
full article
<H2>Fatal police chase met policy - report </H2>03 October 2003
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=5 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD height=5><IMG height=5 alt="" src="http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/images/null.gif" width=5 border=0></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<B>Police involved in a Northland chase that ended in two deaths, reached "undesirable" speeds, but complied with police policy, an investigation has found.</B>




The chase on May 12 this year resulted in the deaths of motorcyclist Kuran Brunton, 29, who was trying to escape police, and Erin Burgess, 18.

Ms Burgess was killed when Mr Brunton's motorbike crossed the centre line and collided with the car she was driving.



The chase occurred after police clocked Mr Brunton's motorbike on radar at 147kmh. When an officer tried to get Mr Brunton to pull over, he slowed down, then when the officer pulled to the side of the road, accelerated away.

Detective Superintendent Steve Shortland, of police national headquarters, who conducted the investigation, said the pursuit reached high speeds across the Ruakaka and Mata straights, 29km southeast of Whangarei.

"While the speeds were undesirable, the road conditions were such that both the (police) Communications Centre, that controlled the pursuit, and the subsequent investigation agreed that there was compliance with the police pursuit policy," Mr Shortland said in a statement.

However, the investigation found that a police claim at the time of the crash that they had pulled out of the chase was wrong.

Shortly after the crash residents living near the scene questioned whether police had actually pulled out of the chase.

Mr Shortland said one police car pursued Mr Brunton for 26km before deciding to abandon the chase when his driving became erratic.

But a second vehicle which had positioned itself ahead of Mr Brunton in the hope of slowing him down or diverting him pulled out in front of him near the crash scene.

He said this vehicle was passed at speed by Mr Brunton's motorbike which crashed into Miss Burgess' car shortly after completing the manoeuvre.

The police vehicle was still technically in pursuit at the time with siren and flashing lights.

Mr Shortland said while the police pursuits policy, which did not place a restriction on pursuit speeds, but directed that a chase should not endanger the safety of any person, was complied with, there were lessons for police in the crash.

These involved the "issuing, receipt and implementation" of abandon pursuit instructions. The second vehicle in the police chase had not stopped pursuit at the time of the crash, even though the first vehicle had, he said.

Mr Shortland said the police investigation found that the crash was caused by a combination of high speed and a section of road in poor condition.

The bend on which the accident happened was programmed for repairs the next day.

Mr Shortland said as a result of the investigation he had recommended that police change their vehicle pursuits policy so that abandon pursuit instructions applied to all vehicles involved in a chase, whether they were in direct pursuit or not at the time.

Ms Burgess, from Auckland, died on the way home from visiting her sick grandfather in Whangarei. Her grandfather died 11 hours after her.

The police investigation into the chase was referred to the Auckland Crown Solicitor, who had concluded that there was no criminal or disciplinary liability on the part of the officers involved, Mr Shortland said.

The investigation file would go to the Police Complaints Authority for review. The Whangarei Coroner will also hold an inquest into the deaths.

Big Dog
3rd October 2003, 16:51
Originally posted by Lou Girardin
It also seems that Police logic says that if you check someone's speed at 147km/h on a straight clear road. It's then OK to chase him for 20+ km's at even higher speeds in order to further 'road safety'.
Policing in NZ has become a f***ing joke.
Lou

What??? where did the riders responsibility go?
If he didnt do a runner in the first place there would be two less funerals this month.

I get a little fed up with hearing how its the cops fault when a high speed chase goes wrong:angry2: If they don't chase them down they will just crack the taps every time they see a flashing blue and red light set.

As a nation we can be a little hypocritical, we cheer when the bad guys get run of the road in the movies, we snicker at the F@#$wits that appear on world scariest police chases and mutter things like only in America.

While I agree that if a chase is endangering the public the police have a responsibility to minimise the hazard to the public, part of minimising that risk is to catch the F*&^wits in the first place.

If your gonna do a runner accept you face Four options,
A) You might get caught even if its not for a few days! High probability! & you just made things worse!

B) You might get badly disfigured!High probability! & you just made things worse!

C) You might get dead! Medium probability! & you just made things worse for the survivors!

E) You might get away and have a story to tell down the pub with your mates who now think your a twit. Unlikely.

Is it worth it?
I guess that depends on the punishment for the crime they were trying to stop you for. I've heard of people dying doing this over a speeding fine..... much less than the value of their life to their family or the cost of a funeral.
I did a runner once and got away with it. Young, stupid, I learnt from it. My pathetic excuse? I thought they would take my bike license off me. I had never had a ticket before and thought that I couldn't live with the automatic 6 month suspension (min) if I got caught (180kmph, dagerous riding -front wheel up- on a restricted).
Is it worth it to you ?

bikerboy
3rd October 2003, 17:44
You forgot to blame Triumph Big dog.

After all a police car pulling out in front of a "speeding" vehicle (bike) traveling at any highway speed, causing a sudden direction change is not a possible cause of an accident.

It's Triumph's fault for building a motorcycle for the rider to speed on that caused the accident.

Let's face it, the police played a significant role, as did the rider, BUT, the police should know better, and again as has happened in the past they were found to have no culpability in the events.

Same old same old !
:argh:

Big Dog
3rd October 2003, 18:43
Originally posted by bikerboy
You forgot to blame Triumph Big dog.

After all a police car pulling out in front of a "speeding" vehicle (bike) traveling at any highway speed, causing a sudden direction change is not a possible cause of an accident.

It's Triumph's fault for building a motorcycle for the rider to speed on that caused the accident.

Let's face it, the police played a significant role, as did the rider, BUT, the police should know better, and again as has happened in the past they were found to have no culpability in the events.

Same old same old !
:argh:
All true but it comes back to the chain of causation (real legal term) the first significant event that contributed that could not be reversed by future action was the rider making the descision to do a runner.
If he had not done a runner the cops would not have been obliged to give chase.

The cops at no time had the opportunity to reverse his action (short of knocking him off like they do to cars). He had plenty of opportunity to reverse the polices decision to give chase by just stopping.

Triumph action was reversible by the rider. They built a machine capable of speeding and put speed in the name. This action was reversed by the rider when he purchased the bike by providing his license as proof he was able to operate the machine within the law, including not speeding, thereby negating the blame of the previous participants the bike shop and triumph.

The police need to be able to do their job, protect the public from those who would do them harm, and enforce the law. If they are not allowed to give chase what is the alternative? Illegalise anything that could cause death?
No guns, knives, baseball bats, pipes, cigarettes, alcohol, bikes, cars, trucks (you get the point) etc

How far do you go do you go with it? Do you ban sleeping because 5/8 of people die in their sleep?

this is the same website that people are always saying "yes but its an accepted / calculated risk". This rider took what he thought was a calculated risk and died. the moral I get from this story is not wrap the world up in cotton wool but don't gamble what you can't afford to lose.

wkid_one
3rd October 2003, 18:55
I must agree with Big Dog - the rider was the one who made the decision to run - none of it would have happened if he didn't run.....therefore he is accountable for the accident.&nbsp; No one made him run

marty
3rd October 2003, 20:50
it's buyer-beware guys and girls. same thing could've happened on a scooter - police chase at horrific 60km/h speeds and rider has a head-on with semi. is it still the fault of the police?
we all need to be responsible for our own actions. triumph dude was.

Antallica
3rd October 2003, 22:39
Yet another reason for Northland cops to give me and my fellow riders hell.

I also notice them eyeing us up a lot more now, better get my restricted before I get pulled over.

jrandom
4th October 2003, 10:39
Originally posted by Antallica
I also notice them eyeing us up a lot more now, better get my restricted before I get pulled over.

Sheeeet, yeah, bro, get on with it. In the same boat myself, overdue... got pulled over for no apparent reason t'other day going down a 50km/h road doing about 55... cop followed me for a while and then turned his lights on. Said it was for a 'license check'.

And then he pointed out that he'd *also* been following me down the motorway at 95... and that's exceeding my learner's limit by 25... BAD jrandom!

I think he believed my story about the L-plate coming off the last time I dropped the bike and me not getting around to buying a new one (ahem). If he'd nailed me for that and doing 95, 'twoulda been $800...

Fortunately he was nice about it, didn't give me a ticket, told me to hurry up and do the restricted test.

Phew. *Really* must pop up on Monday and book it at the LTSA...

bikerboy
4th October 2003, 18:13
Sorry guys but you are WRONG. Bigdog's reversal of action is nonsense.
Causation is the factor which is of paramont importance. Not who is right, wrong, evil, good,or just doing their job.

Biker speeding = accident: unlikely by itself.
Cop stopping biker = accident: no
Biker doing runner = accident: possible.
Cop chasing biker = accident: odds greatly increased but not definitive
Cop "pulling out in front of biker traveling at excessive speed previously refusing to stop = accident: near certainty

Why you may ask, because the cops knew the guy was running, therefore unlikely to stop. So what option does a speeding driver have other than stop if a car pulls out in front of you? Swerve or attempt overtaking. At a high rate of speed this is a dangerous manuever, and given the road was badly surfaced, near a corner and the fact the rider had gone too such lengths to avoid arrest you have a near certain accident in the makingin the event of oncoming traffic. At the very least a predictable event easily avoided by the cop.

Yes the biker set into motion all that followed but the public is known to exhibit bad driving skills and decisions. The cops are supposed to be better trained and better at accessing potential harm. The cop should have recognised the potential danger and staged his block in an straight section of road where the biker could see the block, have plenty of time to stop and ensure no other traffic would be involved.

The biker was WRONG and shares the guilt. BUT the cops acted in a dangerous contributory manner buy setting up a dangerous scenario. All of which resulted in the loss of life of an innocent bystander.:(

mangell6
4th October 2003, 19:07
:argh: :argh:

To be totally illogical who made the decision to

A) Ride the motor bike.
B) Exceed the speed limit.
C) Evade duly authorised persons.
D) Not recognise that the corner was due for repair.
E) Be in the car on the other side of the road.

Now I understand, it is the car drivers fault cos she should not have been there as the person who made the decision to break the law came around the corner. Get a grip!! :angry2:


How is this for a cause and effect.

If person had not been "breaking the law" the police would not have been involved.

While a 'few' of the Highway Patrol are complete dickheads and others have to meet quotas laid down by Helen blaming the Police in this particular case blaming the police is bullshit.

:done:

Mike

MikeL
5th October 2003, 00:10
If someone, for whatever reason, makes a decision to break the law, must he or she assume the entire responsibility for any and all consequences? Even if the actions of others could prevent those consequences? And what if a tragic outcome would in all probability not have occurred if a decision had not been taken to intervene in order to stop the offender? And what if that intervention was in itself dangerous, with a high probability of causing an accident?

I'm with bikerboy on this one. To blame the rider entirely is too simplistic. The police have a difficult job, but that does not absolve them from a share of moral responsibility. The internal police report was predictably a whitewash - how could it be otherwise? "The cause of the accident was a combination of high speed and poor road condition." Obviously. So the actions of the police officer pulling out in front of the bike played no part in the chain of cause and effect??

I don't defend the law-breaking on the part of the rider, but to place all the blame on him is manifestly unfair. He wanted to evade a ticket, sure, and he was reckless. But criminally negligent? To me, the crucial issue is whether he would have crashed into that car if the police car hadn't pulled out in front of him. In a previous discussion of this issue, I said that if I were the police officer involved, I would have a troubled conscience. Several people disagreed violently with my opinion. Fair enough. But I still hold that view.
Like Lou Girardin, I question whether the price paid for enforcing the law was worth it. In their official reports, the police can never ask that question. They must always allocate blame appropriately. But in their private moments, do they never have doubts?

SPman
5th October 2003, 01:26
I agree with BB on this one.&nbsp; If any private citizen pulled out in front of a speeding vehicle, for whatever reason and caused a double fatality, they could expect to be charged with anything up to "careless use of a motorvehicle causing death"! Being in part responsible for a tragic death shows as much lack of judgement on the part of the officers concerned, as did the riders original decision to run and is equally as reprehensible, in my opinion!

But of course, being police, in the great New Zealand tradition, it was someone elses fault and they can get away with it!&nbsp;

&nbsp;:angry2:

wkid_one
5th October 2003, 08:51
I 110% agree with Mangell - how can you absolve someone of breaking the law.

At the end of the day - NONE of these tragic events would have happened if he had pulled over and 'slept in his bed' - instead he chose the chickens way and did a runner.

The police were within their rights to chase and the girl was certainly within her rights.

A bike is difficult to assess speed at the best of times - so the car pulling out - would not have expected the bike to be closing ground so rapidly - how many of us pull out based on how far a car/vehicle is away - and assumed their speed due to the local speed limit??&nbsp; I know I do.

To blame the car pulling out or the cops is a moot point - at the end of the day - all of these actions would have never occurred if he had shut his throttle and pulled left.&nbsp; He is solely to blame as his actions triggered the whole chain of events - and his action was ILLEGAL

SPman
5th October 2003, 20:17
Originally posted by wkid_one
how many of us pull out based on how far a car/vehicle is away - and assumed their speed due to the local speed limit??&nbsp; I know I do.

If so, youre a f**kin idiot. NEVER assume. And in the case of the cop car pulling out in front of the bike, he knew he was speeding!


To blame the car pulling out or the cops is a moot point - at the end of the day - all of these actions would have never occurred if he had shut his throttle and pulled left.&nbsp; He is solely to blame as his actions triggered the whole chain of events - and his action was ILLEGAL

So whats that got to do with basic lack of common sense - by both parties. SFA!

Lou Girardin
6th October 2003, 07:54
In Chicago, I think, they banned police pursuits. At least for minor offences. This has resulted in such anarchic actions as popping wheelies in front of cops, knowing that they can't chase you. But fewer people are being killed in chases now.
You cannot leave the decision to pursue up to the Police Officers involved, they are too close to the action. Likewise, the comms centre is too remote from the situation. There nust be a blanket rule as above. Bear in mind though, that I'm referring to minor offences, not armed robbers, etc.
I was an MOT Motorway cop in the 80's and was involved in chases that make the Whangarei one look like a Sunday drive, in terms of risk. At the time I thought nothing of it, now I realise that we were on borrowed time. Sheer bloody stupidity on my part, just to catch a speeder. The chase was immeasurably more dnagerous than the original offence. Traffic density, speeds and other risk factors are now too high to allow chases of this type.
If the offender doesn't stop in 5 or 10 km's, forget it. It's not worth killing for.
Lou

Sharkey
6th October 2003, 08:15
I gotta say that I agree with big dog and wkid. One major problem with blanket rules, Lou, is that they are blanket, and they are still just rules. You say that if the chase is still going after 5 or 10 km's it should be called off. Well, what's it going to be? 5km's or 10km's? Why? If the same scenario had occured but the crash occurred just 8km's after the pursuit began, well does that then mean the the 10km rule needs changing?

"The other side" in this debate are of course correct in saying that the actions of the authorities can hinder the safe conclusion of the chase, but the person who most significantly hindered safety was the motorcyclist.

In this site there is alot of talk about personal choice, and assessing the risk - I am especially thinking of the helmet discussion. Well, if we demand the right to personal choice, we need to take personal responsibility too.

wkid_one
6th October 2003, 09:43
Bollocks - the riders actions were still illegal - he then started the chain of events.&nbsp; Yes the cops judgement may have been poor - however it was triggered by the rider running - and they employed judgement based on road conditions and traffic I suppose.

The morale is - if the rider hadn't have run - no one would have died.

bikerboy
6th October 2003, 09:48
IF the car pulling out had been joe public then the my opinion would be different. That it was a cop is precisely the point, he knew what the situation was, and still went ahead.

If I were the cop I 'd be trying desperately too rationalize my actions per many of the arguments here, but I know that deep down I wouldn't really believe them and I certainly wouldn't be sleeping well either.
:done: :o

Big Dog
6th October 2003, 10:04
If I held up a bank at gunpoint how easy would you sleep if;
A) You let me get away but shot someone in the next one?
B) You shot me dead no one else was hurt?
C) You shot me dead and I was only armed with a water pistol?
D) You shot me dead and in my death spasms I shot dead 12 bystanders?

None of those situations would have me sleeping well if I was the cop but that is their job.

To make the best judgement possible in the given situation and availible information and leave the rest up to what you believe in god fate etc.

God knows this will get the $#!% well and truly stirred!:gob:

In the above situations any civilian casualtys are called colateral damage and considered the price of democracy why is this different?

wkid_one
6th October 2003, 10:18
I am somewhat confused (not difficult some would say - especially seeing as I am on painkillers).

In my mind (again - no smart comments about size, vacancy, age etc) - I think your point is slighty different - in that your scenario has an automatic pronpensity for voilence by the very nature of the crime.&nbsp; In this case - it was just someone speeding who the cops were pulling over - this happens every single day (100 times in Eketahuna) without people dying.&nbsp; The onus lies with the rider who escalated this in to a tragedy by fleeing.

Even if the cops had pulled over - there is no accounting for the riders speed beyond this point - in all likelihood he would have continued to speed illegally.

I ask you this - had the rider killed the girl just purely due to speeding (147kph is not that quick - shit I do in excess of the that regularly) - he is at fault yes?&nbsp; This is even worse as he committed a crime PRIOR to doing this also.

Your scenario is not an apt comparison as the initial crime is automatically going to illicit a turse action from the police - and panic from the general public - thereby inciting a precarious circumstance immediately.&nbsp; The worst stopping someone for speeding occurs is general curiosity and humour for passerby's.

Yes the Constabulary had a part to play - but only after the rider had chosen his course of action.&nbsp; The Police didn't MAKE him run, nor did they MAKE him keep going.&nbsp; Nor did they MAKE him cross the centre line - the choice was always his.

mangell6
6th October 2003, 10:36
Sharkey wrote

Well, if we demand the right to personal choice, we need to take personal responsibility too.

This sums up the attitude that is lacking in this "gimme, I am entitled . ., its your fault " society.

With life goes responsibility - Where can I get on of those "rant" emoticons from!

Sorry but everyone is responsibile for their own actions, they make the decision, no-one else.

And here endeth the lesson.

Apologies for the rant but this is one of my hobby horses.

Mike

PS No-one told you to take offence, you could have walked through the gate.

PPS Dan I'm off for a ride now, will take some pictures when I get back :D

wkid_one
6th October 2003, 10:41
BASTARD!! No pics please - that is sadistic - can I come watch (nooo that would be worse actually).&nbsp; I am going to try and ride again this weekend - hopefully my shoulder miraculously heals.

I agree Mike - how can anyone other than the rider be responsible?&nbsp; What would you defence in court be?&nbsp; I am sorry I was speeding, and I am sorry I ran - but they made me do it?

marty
6th October 2003, 11:10
Originally posted by Lou Girardin
.
If the offender doesn't stop in 5 or 10 km's, forget it. It's not worth killing for.
Lou

in a recent fatal crash involving young kids in a car that was being 'tailed' by police they crashed and one of them died after 4.8kms.

what should the cut off be? there is no blanket answer. some dangerous pursuits last for 100's of kms. in another chase with highway pursuing a tricked hsv even the police helicopter eagle couldn't keep up on the southern motorway - yes close to 275km/h. - squirrel top speed only 210km/h. no cars were even getting close, and i'm pretty sure no-one was brave enough to put out the spikes. no-one died in that one though, and ANYONE could have innocently pulled out in front of a car closing 170km/h faster than expected.

bluninja
6th October 2003, 11:18
Why not blame Eve...if she'd not bitten from the forbidden fruit then we'd all still be living in Eden....though I don't know if we'd have had bikes:D

Don't like the analogy to armed robbery. The law broken was a technical law, with no victim, or intended victim. Speeding of itself doesn't cause death. I would hate to be chased and put at risk because I'd littered by dropping a banana skin that could cause injury if someone stepped on it and slipped.

For me the issue is not the culpability of the rider(he was responsible for his own choices and actions); but the manner in which the vehicle was chased and the actions leading to the double death. Just because the police have a hard job, doesn't mean they should be able to make mistakes (that cost lives) with (apparent) impunity. They could have made a choice to identify the bike/rider and then prosecute later, but they didn't.

IT would be nice to think that someone in the police is actively thinking (and rehearsing) policies and systems that allow them to do their job in the safest possible way. The appearance is that policies and systems get changed only after a coroners report or investigation into a death.

TTFN

scumdog
6th October 2003, 11:25
Glad to see most of you guys have some common sense and logic.
The fact is the guy doing the runner screwed up - he chose to speed in the forst place, he chose to run and he chose not to slow down after the first cop-car pulled out of the chase.
It's all very well to say "he was only speeding for Gods sake" but thats with 20-20 hindsight, how did the cops know that? how did they know the bike was not stolen or he was not running from a bank robbery/homicide etc etc?
Would you be happy if your bike was stolen and riden past cops at speed and they said "he was speeding too fast so we didn't bother to follow him?
If I was the cop in the car that pulled out on front of the motorbike I would have (a) not expected the bike to still be travelling quite so fast and (b) not known if in fact it was the same bike that was being chased - how do you I.D an approaching bike with certainty? - and judge its speed to assess if it's "excessive"?
My rant and rave and next time one of you heros out there decide to do a runner, just think how flash YOU would look embedded in the side of a car, I bet the drongo on the Triumph was too thick to have such an imagination!!! :angry2:

Kwaka-Kid
6th October 2003, 13:50
well put scumdog i agree fully...

If he had of just raped 10 women and killed all 10 of their husbands and stole your bike... would you be saying "Yeah the police did the right thing in watching him fly passed.. because at least they got that worthless numberplate he stole off a scooter"

Lou Girardin
6th October 2003, 14:34
My comment about giving up after 5 or 10 km's is meant as a generality rather than a rule. Most offenders either give up before that or have disappeared. I'm argueing for a ban on high speed chases for minor offences, which speeding is.
We have been so brow-beaten by Police and LTSA propaganda that many people think 140km/h is certain death. On the Waipu straights, where this chase started, you could add 50 or 100 km/h
to that without excessive risk. Most of us exceed 140 every time we overtake on the open road.
If the rider had sped past a camera, he would've got a ticket in the post. Why didn't the cop do the same?
Because, the offence changed from excess speed to driving at a dangerous speed during the chase and the cop wasn't going to flag that away. The rider continued to flee for the same reason.
The actions of three idiots, the rider and two cops, caused the death of an innocent girl, anyone of the three could have prevented this.
Lou

MikeL
6th October 2003, 14:44
And so the debate goes on, with no sign of either side giving way. On the one hand, uncompromising insistence on law enforcement and personal responsibility for all the consequences of one's actions, and on the other an assertion that the chain of causality and culpability is more complex, and that the police can and do make mistakes.

I would just like to add two points, and then I will say no more - we can agree to disagree.

First, "collateral damage": this is a euphemism, a weasel phrase that tries to hide the reality of either cynical sacrifice for some presumed greater good or simple bad judgement.

Second, if the police had had any reason to suspect that the rider in question was a serial rapist and/or murderer, perhaps their actions might have been easier to justify.

I still maintain that the punishment (of all involved, including families) did not fit the crime.

But, hey, that's just my opinion.
:done:

Lou Girardin
6th October 2003, 15:33
You're right, Mike. But it woke everyone up, didn't it?
I recall one time a cop flagged away a chase before it started though. He was leaving the Ellerslie Motorway Patrol office late one Sunday afternoon, a Ferrari went past so fast that he couldn't read the plate. He saw him go under the Ellerslie interchange. But when he got to the Penrose Rd overbridge, there was no Ferrari to be seen. Cop was on a bike, so it didn't take him long to get up to speed. Bugger!
Lou

jrandom
6th October 2003, 15:38
Originally posted by Lou Girardin
I'm argueing for a ban on high speed chases for minor offences, which speeding is
...
The actions of three idiots, the rider and two cops, caused the death of an innocent girl, anyone of the three could have prevented this.

It seems to me that everyone here is making the implicit assumption that the chappie on the Trumf wouldn't have crossed the centerline if he wasn't being chased. Not sure that's valid, really. Surely the poor state of the road at that point would've had far more to do with the crash than the guy being spooked due to the chase.

As a practical point, I can't see how to go about banning pursuits for 'minor' traffic offenses. Stipulating that the offender would receive a ticket in the post would require the cop in question to establish evidence that the person ticketed did, in fact, do the naughty stuff alleged, and the cop didn't just see them drive past legally, invent some random bad behaviour and 'ticket' them for it. Cameras, perhaps? Too complex, you'd need a 'camera operator' cop in all the patrol cars. The 'pull them over and hand them a ticket' method solves the problem neatly. And it's never any good putting wooly ideas like 'due caution' into the law, really... where the determinism?

For that matter, the idea of letting people get away with traffic infringements if they don't stop immediately after committing the offense would be anathema to 95% of the population.

My personal opinion? If you're riding a bike and you bugger up a corner and two people die, it's YOUR FAULT. Period. Sorry. The cops didn't shunt him into the girl's car, did they?

And don't anybody take the above paragraph as support for the more general 'road safety' attitude prevalent in the country right now. Just what it says, folks, just what it says...

bikerboy
6th October 2003, 17:27
I can't resist these FINAL thoughts.:o
You can't rationalize an event by "what ifs" that never occured, nor were suspected at the time.

The presumption the biker wouldn't have crossed the line is based on odds. Speeding most likely would not have caused him to lose control as he probably wouldn't have been going as fast. Being chased, scared, with adrenalin pumping, increasing speeds, risks taken by impaired decisions, increased the odds of an accident.

A more accurate scenario with the bank robber would be;
bank robbed, thief runs away. police follow firing gun at robber to get him to stop. Stray bullet kill bystander. Is robber responsible?, after all if he hadn't run the police wouldn't have chased him. Or was the action of the police reckless and even predictable given the situation. :(

The police admitted they pulled out in front of him without warning to get him to stop. If they did this not realizing his speed or the road conditions, both layout and surface, they were even more irresponsible.

Finally, I've never said the biker wasn't responsible, just that the police played a part that contributed to the accident. They should be "man enough" to admit it and appologize, instead of covering it up.:done:

SPman
6th October 2003, 18:02
They should be "man enough" to admit it and appologize, instead of covering it up.

Fat chance!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;Deny all responsibility

It was someone elses fault

After all....that is the New Zealand way!

marty
6th October 2003, 18:43
it's not gonna go away any time soon.......

S T U F F S T O R Y

Fatal crash during police pursuit
06 October 2003

Police were pursuing a car when it crashed, killing a man, near Spring Creek on State Highway 1 between Blenheim and Picton today.


Blenheim police Senior Constable Russell Smith said he understood a police patrol had begun a pursuit of the car not long before the crash.

The man, the car's sole occupant, was heading north on SH1 when his car hit a southbound truck and trailer about 1pm.

He died at the scene.

The pursuing police car veered off the road. Two officers in the car were uninjured.

The truck driver was not hurt but was badly shaken, Mr Smith said.

A crash investigation was under way and a Police Complaints Authority investigation would also be done.

The coroner would also investigate.

Police were this afternoon contacting the man's family.

There have been a number of accidents following police pursuits this year.

Recently an investigation found a pursuit of a motorcycle in Northland that ended in two deaths reached "undesirable" speeds but complied with police policy.

The chase on May 12 this year resulted in the deaths of motorcyclist Kuran Brunton, 29, and Erin Burgess, 18.

Ms Burgess was killed when Mr Brunton's motorbike crossed the centre line and collided with the car she was driving.

Meanwhile, the Police Complaints Authority is still investigating the death of a motorcyclist killed after a high-speed police chase on the outskirts of Hastings in July.


http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2682858a10,00.html

marty
6th October 2003, 18:58
here's my last post on this matter. for personal reasons this is something close to my heart. the thing one must ask is WHY was the guy running? was he (or she) drunk, stoned, high on meth (P), carrying a weapon, carrying drugs, on a stolen bike, just beaten someone up, depressed, showing off, etc etc. maybe they just thought that they could outride the cops. the chasing cop has no idea why, but they have a duty to enforce. they will make judgments on the continuation of any pursuit, continuation of any arrest (a few of those have ended up with someone dying too) based on the information they have at the time. for those of you that haven't, put yourselves in the cops' position. at what stage would YOU have pulled out of the pursuit? 180k plus is probably too fast to even initiate a chase, but 145-odd isn't. police policy on pusuits is already pretty tight, after just these types of incidents. an 'elective' pusuit can become an 'imperative' pusuit should the events unfold just so. it's the cops call, just like arresting/ticketing/pepper spraying/shooting someone is - no-one elses, just like the initial speeding offence by triumph dude was

Nouseforaname
6th October 2003, 19:22
Could not have said it better marty!

Bike does a runner = cop ( just doing his job ) pursues = bike crashes = cop to blame? i think not

Sure the cops have to decide when to pull out of a chase and yes maybe sometimes they should pull out earlier, and yes sometimes the cops lie about it, but at the end of the day....... if ya do a runner for what ever reason it's your fault!

As i once said in an earlier post..... if any of my family or friends had been a victim of serious crime and i found out the cops where chasing the offender, but decided to pull out of the chase because they were scared of what joe public was gona think.................. id been damn PISSED OFF!

SPman
6th October 2003, 19:54
Who is saying the cops are to blame!

Basically, 2 (or 3 or 4..)wrongs dont make a right. Trying to pin blame on one party and exonerating all other parties is not going to solve anything.

Its better that all aspects are looked at and where there are mistakes, errors of judgement etc, made, by everyone, admit them, work out ways of trying to avoid them in the future and move on.

In this current climate of blame, fault, liability, etc, no one is prepared to admit any wrong, police or perpetrator alike, bullshit prevails, smokescreens are drawn, everything is reduced to black and white, - someone to blame/charge and everyone else is lily white!&nbsp; And the same things then carry on, over and over, because no one, the police in particular,&nbsp;will be honest and say, oops, sorry, I made a stuff up, I'm sorry, we'll look at ways of trying to prevent this from happening again, etc, etc.

I'm sure if the police (and everyone else)&nbsp;were more honest, open and up front,there would be more respect for them, and we wouldnt question every action they are involved in, looking for the coverup!

But that of course, is in another universe!

&nbsp;

scumdog
6th October 2003, 20:58
One feature common to both sides of this argument - we're all operating on 20-20 hindsight and that makes it easy to say "they should have...".
YOU try being the cops involved in this situation, I'll bet at no time did they think somebodies life would end, even the guy on the Triumph and despite what people think cops ain't superhuman - they think and act just like you and me..
As for the Blenhiem scenario, looking at the crashed car it looked like an '84 Corolla, not the kind of vehicle equiped for a high speed getaway! the road looked straight and the weather fine so I wonder what went wrong this time - except for the screaming obvious fact that yet another drongo decided to run rather than face the music.

Marmoot
6th October 2003, 21:41
Regardless on "whose fault it is", the real issue lies on balancing between interests in catching the criminal and preventing collateral damage.

Which one is more important? Catching a criminal regardless of cost? Or, let him go today and do what we can to trace him?

There was an old saying that goes: live today to fight again tomorrow.

Of course, police chase is a complex situation that needs to be reviewed case by case. But surely there must be a guidelines (more like Checkpoints) that need to be consulted in order to decide to continue the pursuits or not.
For example, lets do this for every minute the chase is on:
- if the speed goes up to xxx, then stop pursuit.
- if it's public road in daylight, then stop pursuit.
- if other people are likely on the road and the speed goes up to yyy (where yyy < xxx), then stop pursuit.
- if we get the number plate of the offender, then stop pursuit.
- if....
- if....
And if none of those checkpoints are satisfied, then keep on pursuing.

How about that?

But hey, I'm just an IT person (not even....), so, that's my "techie-type" point of view. Will it be valid in politics? Maybe yes, maybe not.....although it COULD be my life at stakes. :o

For now, I'd just go back to my email checking. Life goes on, and political correctness destroys democracy, kills freedom and segregate people.

:rockon:

Motoracer
6th October 2003, 21:57
I am just wondering where UK's solution of police YZF-R1 patrol bikes fits in to this. Could it be a sensible option.... if so, they better put some sensible ex-racers on them to be effective.

Imagine that, that would prevent most people from doing runners. The most biggest reason why people do runners is probably because its not that hard to do it in the first place, specially in rural, twisty, alpine areas with the current police bikes and cars running after the crims.

Motoracer
6th October 2003, 22:45
Some examples:

Lou Girardin
7th October 2003, 07:28
Just a correction to jrandom's comment. Most traffic offences now carry owner liability. They don't have to identify the rider, just ticket the owner.
Lou

bikerboy
7th October 2003, 10:12
This is slightly :Offtopic: but I wonder if the police have statistics on the number of people who do a runner and get away with it.

Personally I think the people who try it aren't really thinking, it's a sudden gut reation that they may get away with it. How many really do? We hear about all the failed attempts that end in accidents. One would think that would be enough to deter one from trying.

Perhaps the aggressive policy of chasing is based on far more people trying and succeeding than we ever hear about. There are a lot of urban myths but how many personally know for a fact someone that's done it and lived to tell the tale?

jrandom
7th October 2003, 11:06
Originally posted by bikerboy
Perhaps the aggressive policy of chasing is based on far more people trying and succeeding than we ever hear about. There are a lot of urban myths but how many personally know for a fact someone that's done it and lived to tell the tale?

First ticket I got on the bike, I could've done a runner and got away, I'm sure of it. Especially if I'd had a reasonably fast bike instead of the 150. (Using shoulder on NW m/way, blow past cop sitting in slow lane, cop pulls out to stop me after I go past - I could've cranked it, got off at the Patiki Rd offramp 400m later and hid round the back of one of the industrial blocks before the cop got on my tail properly.)

Generally a piece of piss to get away if you're in heavy-ish traffic I'd imagine. Not so likely on the open road.

I still think I'd rather take the $150 or whatever fine than run the risk of getting arrested and losing my license. I betcha there's plenty of incidences of bikes managing to head off into the sunset without being caught, though.

Motoracer
7th October 2003, 11:46
I know of quite a few successful runners...

Sometimes its just not possible or its too risky and not worth it. At other times, the oppertunity is just given to you at hand. eg, your cruzing at 150kmph on a highway and a HP car comming the other way flashes the red and blue lights. As it slows down to make a U'ie, you have two options:

A: Slow down and gradually stop and wait for the cop to come to you. This is a very sensible option and chances are you might get away with not loosing your licence on the spot, IF the cop is nice. The police will be very greatful for this responce usually and if your offence isn't too bad, they might even let you off with a warning.

B: Gun it!! The HP car has to slow down, then give way to other traffic (if any), then turn around and then accelarate to speed to catch you.... By this time (depending on the bike) You can create a lot of distance between you and the cop. after a few turns, when you are sure that the cop can't see you, turn off to a driveway, smaller road and camp for a while...

Note: I haven't done any of this but I have read some articles in magazines about runners and have heard of success stories from some people.

Lou Girardin
7th October 2003, 12:06
Not that I'm advocating anything as irresponsible as doing a runner. But if you do, get off straight, multi lane roads as quick as you can and DON'T turn left. Almost everyone being chased takes left turns. If the cop loses sight of you, he'll always check the left side roads first.
Just don't kill yourself doing it.
Lou

georgedubyabush
7th October 2003, 13:26
Originally posted by Motoracer
I know of quite a few successful runners...

A: Slow down and gradually stop and wait for the cop to come to you. This is a very sensible option and chances are you might get away with not loosing your licence on the spot, IF the cop is nice. The police will be very greatful for this responce usually and if your offence isn't too bad, they might even let you off with a warning.


I'd just drop down to the speed limit and carry on until&nbsp;THEY pull you over. If you stop yourself then you're pretty much admitting your guilt. There goes your "sorry officer didnt realise my speed"... probably wont get you off but worth a shot.

It's like not quickly hiding your detector if pulled up. It's like a billboard with 'chronic speeder' written in flashing neon

Motoracer
7th October 2003, 13:40
Originally posted by georgedubyabush
I'd just drop down to the speed limit and carry on until&nbsp;THEY pull you over. If you stop yourself then you're pretty much admitting your guilt. There goes your "sorry officer didnt realise my speed"... probably wont get you off but worth a shot.

It's like not quickly hiding your detector if pulled up. It's like a billboard with 'chronic speeder' written in flashing neon

True... how ever if you do admit the guilt straight away and say you know what you did and you are very sorry about it, it can sometimes help to get on their good side and possibely lessen the penalties. Its another way to go I reckon, I have tired it and it did work, luckily enough...

wkid_one
7th October 2003, 14:16
If you do the crime - do the time!

You know you are speeding -&nbsp;you know the punishment for speeding - and you know the risks of speeding......

Think of a speeding ticket as a speeding premium - you pay one once in a while for the PRIVILEDGE of speeding.&nbsp;

I'm sorry but if a biker crashed in to my car coz he was doing a runner - he better bloody well hope the impact killed him/her, because if I am able - I will.

wkid_one
7th October 2003, 14:17
PS - I can't honestly say I would stop tho in the heat of the moment

Lou Girardin
7th October 2003, 14:48
I don't have much faith in the application of mercy in these days of quotas. Still, I did get off one ticket and he'd seen the detector too. :gob:

Sharkey
7th October 2003, 15:13
Originally posted by georgedubyabush
I'd just drop down to the speed limit and carry on until&nbsp;THEY pull you over. If you stop yourself then you're pretty much admitting your guilt. There goes your "sorry officer didnt realise my speed"... probably wont get you off but worth a shot.

It's like not quickly hiding your detector if pulled up. It's like a billboard with 'chronic speeder' written in flashing neon

Been there, done that, doesn't work.

Kwaka-Kid
7th October 2003, 15:13
well i have to be honest here and say that i very much doubt that too many get away and half the storys are shit... the motorcycle cop i know has only lost 2-3 chases in about 10+ years... thats chases he has engaged in.. i have heard also of 1-2 stories of a bike flying passed real fast whilst he was writing&nbsp;a ticket...obviously that doesnt count...once eagle is involved you have no chance.. and most people end up trying too hard and running hot into a corner and throwing themselves off... as big and ugly as the current ST1100's are.. they do have a surprising takeoff.

DeanOh
7th October 2003, 17:18
Originally posted by Sharkey
Been there, done that, doesn't work.


Me too...cost me $500.....shoulda just kept going.

Jackrat
7th October 2003, 18:59
And then again if the coppers had a high power rifle they could of just shot the prick.He had his chance to stop but ran,after that it wasn,t just a speeding ticket.Why did he run???Fuck im,An who are you going to call if somebody steels your bike.If a shit head
runs from the cops, they should shoot the prick dead.

Big Dog
7th October 2003, 19:02
Well this one put a cat amongst the pigeons huh?:angry2: :brick: :bash: :ar15: :mad: :argh: :beer: :argh: :Oops: :beer:

scumdog
7th October 2003, 19:54
A thought to you guys that didn't do a runner - you're still here and alive to moan about it, I'll bet the bozo in the Whangarei chase will be thinking he should have stopped, - if dead men can think. ( mind you I don't reckon he could "think" for the last 20 minutes or so of his sorry life) :p

Oscar
7th October 2003, 20:39
Originally posted by Lou Girardin
.
The actions of three idiots, the rider and two cops, caused the death of an innocent girl, anyone of the three could have prevented this.
Lou

Pray tell, how do you know this as fact?????????
The guy obviously had no problem with travelling at extra-legal speeds, how do you know that he would have slowed down when the cops stopped chasing?

God knows I'm no fan of the Feds, but get a grip fella - the guy was a dickhead.........

georgedubyabush
7th October 2003, 21:21
Someone mentioned it earlier somewhere in the thread that perhaps the cop pulling out didn't cause the rider to swerve.

The Northern Advocate had an&nbsp;article yesterday on the report&nbsp;and&nbsp;implied that the cop pulled out in front of (not at) the rider, then the rider overtook the cop which resulted in the crash. This is the same cop that had his lights on so the rider surely wouldve seen him in plenty of time. Do we get to read the actual report?

They had a picture of the bike too. It's the same&nbsp;wreck I saw in at Shaws Kawasaki when I got my service a couple of months ago. (They share a service alley with the copshop)

SPman
7th October 2003, 21:50
<DIV id=0></DIV>

<SPAN id=hbblock><LABEL id=HbSession SessionId="2413365206"></LABEL>
Originally posted by wkid_one
If you do the crime - do the time!
You know you are speeding -&nbsp;you know the punishment for speeding - and you know the risks of speeding......
Think of a speeding ticket as a speeding premium - you pay one once in a while for the PRIVILEDGE of speeding.&nbsp;&nbsp;
</SPAN>

<SPAN>Fuck off!</SPAN>

SPman
7th October 2003, 21:50
<DIV id=0></DIV>

<SPAN id=hbblock><LABEL id=HbSession SessionId="2413365206"></LABEL>
Originally posted by wkid_one
If you do the crime - do the time!
You know you are speeding -&nbsp;you know the punishment for speeding - and you know the risks of speeding......
Think of a speeding ticket as a speeding premium - you pay one once in a while for the PRIVILEDGE of speeding.&nbsp;&nbsp;
</SPAN>


Cliche, cliche, cliche!


<SPAN>Fuck off!</SPAN>

Lou Girardin
8th October 2003, 07:33
Making running fron the Police a capital offense? That's a hell of a leap isn't it?
By the way, if your bikes stolen, do you really think the cops give a shit?
Lou

scumdog
8th October 2003, 07:45
Field of Dreams, your replies are cliches - or is that you just baiting us up by putting in two identical replies???
At the end of the day there has to be SOME incentive to not travel at warp factor three ALL the time!!!

Jackrat
10th October 2003, 16:36
Getting shot for running from the cops,A hell of a leap,No Iv,e always felt that way,Do the cops care if your bike gets nicked ??
probably not,,Ever wonder why.If a cop gets screwed about by some tosser on a bike how do you think he,s going to view the next one?.The very simple FACT remains that a young girl died because of the actions of a BIKER who was given the chance to stop and chose not to.I,m damn sure if the cops didn,t chase him and he then ran into you,your self centered blame it on the cops attitude would change to suit yourself.

Big Dog
10th October 2003, 19:28
Originally posted by Jackrat
your self centered blame it on the cops attitude would change to suit yourself.

So you think if the cops had abandoned the chase completely and the biker hit her anyway they would be moaning about how its the cops fault because they let the biker go?

Something to cogitate on huh?:o :beer:

Jackrat
10th October 2003, 20:43
No,I think the cops should have run him off the road before he got that far.The cops are damned if they do,damned if they don,t.
Some people feed on it.,,, Tell it to the dead girl.
Something else to think about.

k14
20th October 2003, 14:38
Yeah, i agree it was totally the idiots fault for trying to ditch the cop. Also i dont think that if a savillian had pulled out in front of the biker they would have been convicted, if they had a half decent lawyer, they may not have even been charged.

A few months ago i did a runner. I just thought it would be "fun". The consequences never crossed my mind. I ended up canning off goin round a corner. Looking back at it i am kind of glad i fell off when i did. I only ended up getting charged with failing to stop, but it could have easily been alot worse. I could have easily ended up in prison or even worse. When i look back at it i needed something like that to knock some sense into me. I drove like a complete dickhead with no reguard for the safety of me or others. Now i dont even go more than 10kph over the speed limit. When i think about it i am ashamed at how stupid and immature i was. I havent really told anyone about it cause it was such a stupid thing to do.

I dont have any sympathy for the rider that got killed. He got what he deserved. I should have got in alot more shit than i did. But i appreciate that the judge and cops were a bit lienient on me because it was a first offence. But i have definately learnt my lesson, and will never do that again.

I hope noone reading this will make the same mistake that the dead guy and i did. It isnt worth it for a $200 or so saving.

Lou Girardin
20th October 2003, 15:37
That's a hell of an admission, k14. I admire your guts in doing it.
But, if you're on 90 demerits or more than 50 km/h over, then that's quite an incentive for some people to run. They're going to lose their licence anyway. That's why I'm against automatic disqualification, if you think you have a chance to keep your licence most people would stop. Personally, I don't think my bike skills are good enough to lose a cop and in a car you'll be stuffed by traffic anyway.
Lou

Coldkiwi
20th October 2003, 17:11
that does take guts to admit.

Of course, if there's enough traffic around it should be mere childs play to loose a cop car and even do so in relative safety. Granted if thats not the case though I can see how it would escalate into a very dangerous manner of riding.

Kwaka-Kid
20th October 2003, 18:28
i dunno Coldkiwi... if we are talking about bike cops thru traffic.. yeah they might have wide bikes etc.. but i honestly think too many ppl out there underestimate either a) the bike, or b) the cop riding it's abilities... these guys put up with runners weekly etc, its nothing big, because they are used to it i feel most often remain calm and focused etc etc, i could harp on forever, but on the most honest note ever i dont think i could outrun any of the cop's on bikes whilst on my VFR400, not even with the "ive got nothing to loose" state of mind.-and with that state of mind you end up with a ride in an ambulance instead of a patrol unit.

k14
20th October 2003, 20:14
Those were my thoughts Kawa Kid. But now i hold a slightly different view.

I was in moderate to heavy traffic conditions in surburban streets. But the holden stayed right on my arse. All of the traffic were pulling over and he was travelling at virtually the same speed as me. Which was in excess of 120kph at times. So i was pushing it too hard going round a corner and went over a manhole cover and lost the front end. Next thing i knew i was being read my rights.

I hope i get through to some people that the cops always win. I could look at it and say that i could have got away and not been arrested etc. But i also could have ended up in a body bag, or killed an innocent bystander. If i had got away i wouldnt have learnt my lesson and would have probably done it again.

I have to live with this conviction for the rest of my life. It had already cost me two prospective jobs and it is near impossible for me to get insurance now. But i look at it in the way that i got off lightly. As i said earlier, i could be in prison or even dead.

I just hope that you guys will take note of my experiences and think twice before you try to loose the cop.

scumdog
20th October 2003, 21:03
Good on you K14 for having the balls to admit your experience, I too did a couple of runners in cars in th '70s, not much traffic down south back then and a higher top speed on the open road soon gave me enough gap to shoot down a side road and lose the cop.
Not now, no-way, in hindsight I have thought "it would have been easy to lose him" but thats after the event with the famous 20-20- hindsight, who actually knows what will be the REAL outome when they decide to do a runner?? only God I'd say!!!
It ain't worth it.

Jackrat
21st October 2003, 09:35
Good on ya,K14.yeah we all make mistakes an pay for them in our own ways.It,s nice when someone admits to learning from them.Iv,e just got home from the RUSTY NUTS MC 1000 miler,two
guys on the run did a runner with speeds over two hundred km
being claimed by the cops who are now bitching at the club.
Nether of these two guys are club members but the club is having to cop the flack,We can,t and don,t try to control the speed of guys who show up,but the coppers ether don,t know or don,t care about that.It pisses me off a little that these guys have diss,ed our club an now there is a copper out there that will nail me at any cost.Ahhhh well he would probably nail me anyway but it is something to think about.
Cheers.

jrandom
21st October 2003, 12:41
Originally posted by Jackrat
two guys on the run did a runner with speeds over two hundred km being claimed by the cops who are now bitching at the club

So, did they get away with it then? And what were they riding?

Come on - details, man, details...

SPman
21st October 2003, 16:48
And how did the run go this year?.....Lee??

Jackrat
21st October 2003, 17:27
jrandom,Mate I think you missed the point of my thread.
Other than that the run went very well,seventy odd riders finished,Two guys crashed,coller bones,ribs,blood,pain,wrote off
bikes,shit happens.The weather was amazing sun,sun,sun.
For more info,check out thr rustynuts mc web site in a few days,once Lee has had time to write it up.
Cheers.

Coldkiwi
21st October 2003, 17:43
Originally posted by Kwaka-Kid
i dunno Coldkiwi... if we are talking about bike cops thru traffic.. yeah they might have wide bikes etc.. but i honestly think too many ppl out there underestimate either a) the bike, or b) the cop riding it's abilities... these guys put up with runners weekly etc, its nothing big, because they are used to it i feel most often remain calm and focused etc etc, i could harp on forever, but on the most honest note ever i dont think i could outrun any of the cop's on bikes whilst on my VFR400, not even with the "ive got nothing to loose" state of mind.-and with that state of mind you end up with a ride in an ambulance instead of a patrol unit.

KK, no disrespect to your old man but I'd rate myself as a reasonable chance through heavy traffic even against our bike cops. Simply based on experience really. I ride (probably too fast) continuously through gaps (big/small/closing etc) both too and from work everyday. While they have probably had more training than me, I would question whether they actually get the chance to practice it to the same extent.

They do of course have a radio on their side which significantly tilts the odds in any cops favour so they can ring their mates. To be honest, i would've had to be doing something pretty freakin stupid to a)not see the cop on the motorway and b) consider running. I certainly wouldn't run from a bike cop&nbsp;for a lane splitting type offences although I would consider just carrying on my merry way if some spam (canned pig) saw me, hit the disco lights and it was heavy traffic (especially if there was no emergency shoulder for them to take to).

my 2 cents.. all hypothetical of course :p

jrandom
21st October 2003, 17:49
Originally posted by Jackrat
jrandom,Mate I think you missed the point of my thread.

No no, I understand what you were getting at. Was being a bit flippant, thass all...

Slim
21st October 2003, 20:44
Originally posted by Motoracer
A: Slow down and gradually stop and wait for the cop to come to you. This is a very sensible option and chances are you might get away with not losing your licence on the spot, IF the cop is nice. The police will be very greatful for this response usually and if your offence isn't too bad, they might even let you off with a warning.
If the lights go on & they clearly indicate they're after you specifically, stop. If you see brake lights in your mirrors, but no lights, carry on at the posted speed limit until they're sitting on yer arse and their lights are turned on.

It's not often that you get out of a speeding ticket these days, but it does still happen, every now and then. ;)

But it sure as hell won't happen if you deal with "attitude" or do a runner. <_<


I'm not gonna comment on the Whangarei chase, because there's not enough info supplied for any of us to form an opinion.

Kwaka-Kid
21st October 2003, 20:57
hmm CK all good and i do understand.. but you say u lane split everyday etc.. whos to say they dont? thats my exact point.. im saying they do and have done for the last 20years most likley!! not in own time.. but chasing people like you... im serious.. who knows, they prolly do it for more KM's per day then you put on ur bike a week ;) dunno.. i will find out.. you have to remember 8hours a day on a bike is ALOT of K's... and altho thats not how it always worksout obviously, they get alot of use really fast... oh also everyone make sure ur polite and say hello to the new westie bike cop when ur pulled over, apparently really nice guy, and if hes half what his father was not only will he outride you but prolly leave you with a few broken bones if you do anything stoopid... :)&nbsp; -i say gotta love them old coppas!

Lou Girardin
22nd October 2003, 08:12
Don't forget, he's got flashers and siren to help clear the way. Takes a lot of stress out of getting through traffic.
Lou

Marmoot
22nd October 2003, 11:06
I don't lanesplit.
I'm a dumba$$ fekin paranoid rider.
But, yes. I don't lanesplit.
When you live with low pay that $1 or $2 a day will make a big difference while still saving up for over10k tuition fee, you will live paranoidly. I'm a victim of state tax terorism.

Big Dog
22nd October 2003, 13:34
I only lanesplit in standstill traffic not coz I'm a puss but because like marmoot I am a victim of the random acts of terrorism by the I R D. Between Tax, Child support and, the dreaded student loan I pay the vampires more than half my average income.

I now work 45-75 hours a week for less take home than I got as a 30hour student! WTF is up with that?

If I dropped it, my bike would become a paper weight until I finnished paying it off so that I could afford the repairs. So I never drive outside my brakes.

But being an old oil cooled (no fan, no radiator) in stand still I will split not out of impatience but out of mechanical sypathy as "the old girl gets all het up over nuthin" to quote Jed Clampett.

Its either that or stop halfway on the shoulder to let her cool down.:Offtopic:

jonbuoy
11th December 2005, 15:36
I can't imagine how terrifying it would be to be in a sidecar on a police fireblade in a high speed pursuit! Is that photo for real?

If it was a boy racer in an evo' running from the police, crossing white lines doing crazy overtakes to get away and I was coming from the opposite direction on my bike I'd want the police to get em and throw their keys away before they killed someone ie me.
You can still cause a hell of a lot of damage on a bike if your traveling 200ish k's and have a head on, even if its with an SUV - people have a tendancy to swerve away from whatevers coming towards them - you don't have time to think - ah its just a bike and I'm in a car - hes not gonna do me any harm. Swerve at high speed = loss of control.

Running from the police is a dumb thing to do, you ride a bike and speed (I do 75points and counting -I still don't think Police are the bad guys, except if ur the one that busted my tail at 116 KMs empty road early sunday morning!) - you know the risk and you should accept it. Just like you accept the risk of every other part of motorcycling.

Its a tragic accident but the police shouldn't be blamed, I'm sure they feel bad enough about it, and so would the biker if hed survived and the girl hadn't.

Just my opinion.

kro
11th December 2005, 17:14
What??? where did the riders responsibility go?
If he didnt do a runner in the first place there would be two less funerals this month.

I get a little fed up with hearing how its the cops fault when a high speed chase goes wrong:angry2:

Bingo, give this man a lifetime supply of beer.

This point the finger, bullshit game, tarnishes the reputation of an already overtaxed police force, who have some of the most thankless jobs in existence.
WTF is the cop sposed to do?, ignore him and send the message out to the public that the cops are soft-cocks, and wont give chase?, or do they do their damn job, only to have some dickhead rider waste himself, because he was too chicken-shit to face the music, and get a ticket?.

Sorry, zero sympathy, the biker is a chicken shit in my books, if you decide to take off, be prepared to be chased.

Lou Girardin
12th December 2005, 07:28
Bingo, give this man a lifetime supply of beer.

This point the finger, bullshit game, tarnishes the reputation of an already overtaxed police force, who have some of the most thankless jobs in existence.
WTF is the cop sposed to do?, ignore him and send the message out to the public that the cops are soft-cocks, and wont give chase?, or do they do their damn job, only to have some dickhead rider waste himself, because he was too chicken-shit to face the music, and get a ticket?.

Sorry, zero sympathy, the biker is a chicken shit in my books, if you decide to take off, be prepared to be chased.

The threads dead.
It's got a big DNR posted on it now. DO NOT RESUCITATE.

Marmoot
12th December 2005, 16:31
The threads dead.
It's got a big DNR posted on it now. DO NOT RESUCITATE.

Yeah, that's right! Wot he said!
I, for one, would not post in this thread ever again if I were you.
Don't post in here anymore. It will only dredge the thread back up the headlines. :mad:

kro
12th December 2005, 18:50
sorry, didnt read the date. Im new, not a doofus.

Marmoot
12th December 2005, 20:44
sorry, didnt read the date. Im new, not a doofus.

I want to be the last one to post here, so here's my 10-characters :bash:

Lou Girardin
13th December 2005, 07:26
Too quick, I'm last.

sugilite
13th December 2005, 09:03
Somthing I've noticed since cops have been told to pull out of dangerous chases is the speeds they quote in the press, such as pulling out wehn speeds reached 80 kph in 50 areas, and 130 kph in 100 areas. I think that is rubbish! Grannies in there mobility scooters would have passed both the cops and the speedsters at that pace!
I reckon the people they are chasing and the cops themselves are going a lot faster, I mean, who is going to say in the dock they had been going a lot faster than the cops said they were!
Very fishy me thinks!

Pixie
13th December 2005, 12:23
You forgot to blame Triumph Big dog.

After all a police car pulling out in front of a "speeding" vehicle (bike) traveling at any highway speed, causing a sudden direction change is not a possible cause of an accident.

It's Triumph's fault for building a motorcycle for the rider to speed on that caused the accident.

Let's face it, the police played a significant role, as did the rider, BUT, the police should know better, and again as has happened in the past they were found to have no culpability in the events.

Same old same old !
:argh:
It's Gottlieb Daimler's fault!!

Sniper
13th December 2005, 13:12
sorry, didnt read the date. Im new, not a doofus.

New since 18th October 2005?