Police killing us again!

[Bald Eagle]

It would be nice if we could return to a time when there was some jounalistic integrity and actual reporting not just the cut and paste sound bites from the multi national media owners..

[phill-k]

Hardly a funny incident if you ask me. The only thing I'm laughing about is that most of you are so apathetic about anything that doesn't affect you directly. You're quite content to believe the lies and statistics the government controlled media in this country feeds you.
Of course these nasty horrible bikers are all speedign and riding like arseholes.
Of courise it was their fault.
Of course it couldn't be the nice policeman's fault.
Speed kills, if you speed you deserve to die.
Happy happy Kiwi's, New Zealand is nirvana and the rest of the world is wrong.

Newsflash for you, Katman and your ilk :- they'll come for you soon enough but nobody else will be around to help you.

I don't think anyone is laughing at what happened to the rider, but at your diatribe that is what is laughable - replace the U turning vehicle with a flock of bulls who have got through a gate, after a naughty boy had been into the roadside paddock picking mushrooms and forgot to shut the gate - there was a hazard on the road and he unfortunately didn't stop in time to avoid said hazard. As part of the assessment made to gauge his speed a number of things will be taken into account, road conditions, vehicle conditions and the riders ability and his mental and physical state. At 100km per hour he would have needed 92mtrs to come to a complete stop, the evidence at the scene shows clearly the impact was at a speed that is inconsistent with 100km an hour, thus some other factor needs to be considered, higher speed, reaction time inhibited, mechanical failure, it will have all been considered and examined.
Some of the on eyed statements on here are laughable, lets all blame the other person, in this case a police officer, at the end of the day is the police officer really guilty of anything - the road code clearly requires the operator of a vehicle to travel at a speed that will allow the vehicle to stop in the clear road ahead- I say again if there were cattle or some such on the road what of it then.

[trustme]

It would be nice if we could return to a time when there was some jounalistic integrity and actual reporting not just the cut and paste sound bites from the multi national media owners..

The press has never been independant or unbiased. We were just too naive to realise it. I do regret that there appears to be little true investigative journalism, we now deal in sound bites we can't be bothered with detail. Correspondence has been reduced to that lowest common denominator , the txt .

[scumdog]

The press has never been independant or unbiased. We were just too naive to realise it. I do regret that there appears to be little true investigative journalism, we now deal in sound bites we can't be bothered with detail. Correspondence has been reduced to that lowest common denominator , the txt .

Don't worry, this boy has no illusions as the the truth, accuracy and integrity of the media.

Noddy in Toytown is a more accurate depiction of real life compared to the medias effort.

[Conquiztador]

Also interesting that, as quoted in the story;

"An expert engineering consultant estimated Mr Brown was travelling between 135 and 155kmh before he hit his brakes."

The upper limit of this speed is very close to the speed check of 154 km/h that was the cause of this U turn.

Could it be possible both vehicles were racing?

Could it be possible that it was the same vehicle? Perhaps there never was a ute and it is just a smokescreen to "justify" the U-turn?

[MSTRS:Me]

I don't think anyone is laughing at what happened to the rider, but at your diatribe that is what is laughable - replace the U turning vehicle with a flock of bulls who have got through a gate, after a naughty boy had been into the roadside paddock picking mushrooms and forgot to shut the gate - there was a hazard on the road and he unfortunately didn't stop in time to avoid said hazard. As part of the assessment made to gauge his speed a number of things will be taken into account, road conditions, vehicle conditions and the riders ability and his mental and physical state. At 100km per hour he would have needed 92mtrs to come to a complete stop, the evidence at the scene shows clearly the impact was at a speed that is inconsistent with 100km an hour, thus some other factor needs to be considered, higher speed, reaction time inhibited, mechanical failure, it will have all been considered and examined.
Some of the on eyed statements on here are laughable, lets all blame the other person, in this case a police officer, at the end of the day is the police officer really guilty of anything - the road code clearly requires the operator of a vehicle to travel at a speed that will allow the vehicle to stop in the clear road ahead- I say again if there were cattle or some such on the road what of it then.

You are right, in so far as the onus is on a motorist to be able to stop in half the clear road etc, but...
If the hazard he couldn't avoid was someone else's fault, wandering stock or something fell off another vehicle or whatever, efforts would be made to id the owner and they will be charged for their negligence.

Could it be possible that it was the same vehicle? Perhaps there never was a earlier bike and it is just a smokescreen to "justify" the U-turn?

Where was another bike mentioned? It was a green ute.

[Conquiztador]

Some of the on eyed statements on here are laughable, lets all blame the other person, in this case a police officer, at the end of the day is the police officer really guilty of anything - the road code clearly requires the operator of a vehicle to travel at a speed that will allow the vehicle to stop in the clear road ahead- I say again if there were cattle or some such on the road what of it then.

So if he had not died and there would have been an investigation that concluded that:
1. The police was doing a U-turn at the place under the crest.
2. The bike crashed in to the police car that made a U-turn while riding at 100k/h
Are you saying that the biker would have been charged as he was at fault as he did not adjust his speed accordingly?

[Conquiztador]

Where was another bike mentioned? It was a green ute.

Sorry, my mistake. I knew that...

[Pixie]

Also interesting that, as quoted in the story;

"An expert engineering consultant estimated Mr Brown was travelling between 135 and 155kmh before he hit his brakes."

The upper limit of this speed is very close to the speed check of 154 km/h that was the cause of this U turn.

Could it be possible both vehicles were racing?

Well that's a vindication of the 3 point turn.

It's like saying the guy in Taupo who shot the teacher brushing her teeth was vindicated because she was doing duck impressions

[MSTRS:Me]

Well that's a vindication of the 3 point turn.

It's like saying the guy in Taupo who shot the teacher brushing her teeth was vindicated because she was doing duck impressions

What do you expect. He's a card-carrying member of the thick blue line and he will do/say anything to divert attention from their fuckups.

[Pixie]

At 100km per hour he would have needed 92mtrs to come to a complete stop, the evidence at the scene shows clearly the impact was at a speed that is inconsistent with 100km an hour, thus some other factor needs to be considered, higher speed, reaction time inhibited, mechanical failure, it will have all been considered and examined.

Where do you get 92m from.Is it,as I expect,out of some outdated road code.Base on the braking abilities of a Ford Anglia? Top Gear showed that the braking stats in the British road code were just that and the capabilities of a modern car showed them to be laughable.
And show me where the experimental evidence showing how much damage a motorcycle does to a car at varying speeds and varying angle of impact,including being on it's side.Otherwise any estimate of speed is purely wild conjecture.

As for the SCU.On the TV program they used to air following the SCU on it's daily business,I saw an SCU investigator look for deformation in the brake light filaments in a large car that hit a cyclist - as if the cyclist would decelerate a 2 tonne car at sufficient G to cause any deformation.Also,the SCU investigator who raised a car on a hoist,placed it in gear and turned the rear wheels by hand.After doing this he announced,with a confused look on his face that there was something wrong with the transmission,as he should not be able to turn the wheel - someone needed to explain how a differential works to that "expert"

[MSTRS:Me]

At 100km per hour he would have needed 92mtrs to come to a complete stop, the evidence at the scene shows clearly the impact was at a speed that is inconsistent with 100km an hour...

Stopping distance is subject to too many variables to be precise (ie a particular distance cannot cover all circumstances).
Add in a downhill as well...

[Spearfish]

at least 10 characters.

[MSTRS:Me]

The press has never been independant or unbiased. We were just too naive to realise it. I do regret that there appears to be little true investigative journalism, we now deal in sound bites we can't be bothered with detail. Correspondence has been reduced to that lowest common denominator , the txt .

There was plenty of detail in the report I mentioned. It was just the hook that the SCU was investigating for speed/alcohol - as though nothing else ever causes prangs.
To be fair, in this particular case I doubt that anything but speed/alcohol were causative, but the paper could have said "It is believed that speed and alcohol were major factors, but the SCU is investigating to rule out any other cause."

[MSTRS:Me]

This event has really got under your skin and found a nerve to tickle.

You got me!
Yes, you're right. I get upset when bikers die because someone else did something stupid.
Perhaps the many instances of cops doing U-turns causing death/injury to others, esp bikers, are given far more exposure that the countless number of same by 'ordinary' motorists. Somehow, it seems worse that professionals charged with keeping our roads safe (whatever that is) are the cause of any mayhem at all. Perhaps it is the fact that they are quick to accuse/charge ordinary motorists with careless/dangerous causing injury/death, but there is no such speed to do the same with their own. The reasons for this may be good, but it still rankles. And when such as RM point the blazing finger of guilt anywhere but at his colleague, that really annoys me. He wouldn't be doing that if it wasn't a cop that pulled that manoeuvre.