Police killing us again!

[St_Gabriel]

how would you feel...id be f**ken livered with myself.

If this was not such a serious thread, I could make a really offal joke about that

[bogan]

im not dismissing his point, the ute driver should feel like crap as a major player in his mates death, his poor decision was the trigger for a further poor decision or two.

Ask yourself honestly that if you were the driver of that ute, how would you feel...id be f**ken livered with myself.

Where do you draw the line though, what about the last person talking to him before he set off? If they hadn't said as much and let him leave a few seconds earlier....

The ute driver didn't create any risk though (to those behind him anyway), simply being one of the factors that allowed Paul, and the policeman to put Paul's life at risk is nothing to feel guilty about.

[rustic101]

But the decision by Michael Lenihan to instigate the pursuit created the situation in the first place.

And absolutely NOTHING has come out of this, and Bridgeman's court cases to modify the Police Pursuit policy.

LENIHANS' crash; as tragic as it was, was not a Pursuit. The criteria to classify it as a 'Pursuit' was not even remotely close to being achieved. Therefore the "Pursuit Policy", is irrelevant.

Every Police crash involving serious injury or death is investigated by the IPCA, internally and or by the Coronial investigation at a minimum. This includes all documentation, Policy and Procedures used. All recommendations (if any) from the IPCA, Coroner, Judge, and or any internal investigation, if applicable, are included into a change package which is then distributed.

What happened was a tragic crash involving a number of factors, pure and simple.

[riffer]

LENIHANS' crash; as tragic as it was, was not a Pursuit. The criteria to classify it as a 'Pursuit' was not even remotely close to being achieved. Therefore the "Pursuit Policy", is irrelevant.

Bullshit...

he made the decision to chase.

The u-turn is the first part of the pursuit.

[FJRider]

Interesting the word pursuit is mentioned ... considering two vehicles (ute and bike) were travelling at similar speeds, less than 20 seconds (possibly less) apart ... not connected to the result ... ??? mmmmm

[Art P]

The cardinal sin (yet again) of doing shit in a blind spot...
How many times/investigations must there be, before a clear instruction is given..."Do not stop or turn without several hundred metres clear road in both directions"

Yes I see the officer only got a fine! If it was you or me the would have locked us up and thrown away the key one rule for them and another for us!

[Robbo]

Workplace incident investigations is a large part of my role.

And a major facet of that is causal, contributing and direct causes of incidents.

The speeding ute is a lemon.

I would be looking at the mentality of the driver of the police car and the culture within the workforce that could cause them to pull such a shit stunt (this could indicate if there were big issues within that work force that need to be challenged), then I would be looking to see if he had the proven capacity to identfy it as a dangerous maneuver, In this case I would be looking to see if he was fit for his role and if he had training specifically for the tasks he was undertaking.

Either way, at the end of the day, he is the cock, not the driver of the ute. There could have been 100 drivers in that area breaking the law and only one of them caused the death of another person.

Hey Headbanger, at last we've got something we both agree on. My original post was just a hypothetical look at three scenarios that if they had'nt happened Paul would still be alive today. Unfortunately this was'nt the case. Anyway, back to that U-turn. Yes, it was a very Bad decision especially given it's proximity to the brow of the hill and not the sort of thing i would have expected from our traffic police.
The whole subject of U-turns needs to be addressed and highlighted as they pose a great risk to us as bike riders. I have had quite a few close calls due to sudden and not indicated U-turns over the years as i'm sure you have too.
Maybe a series of TV adds to show the dangers of the U-turn and funded by the Govt. After all, they are raking in enough dollars from us through registration and ACC leveys etc.
Cheers

[rustic101]

Bullshit...

he made the decision to chase.

The u-turn is the first part of the pursuit.

Right, Never let the facts get in the way of your cause....

Go and have a good read of the latest Pursuit Policy, interpret, understand it and get back to us.

[MarkH]

With due respect Mark, you obviously did'nt read correctly or understand my first post. If the ute driver had'nt been speeding in the first place then the cop would never have been attempting to make a u-turn to chase him.
So don't go assuming that i am making excuses for him. Think before you post.

I DID read your post and I understood exactly what you were saying. I also thought about it and disagreed with it. If you read my post properly you might have understood what I was saying - the ute speeding didn't MAKE the cop try to turn where he did, it was the cop's decision to turn in a dangerous place and he could have decided something different, even though a ute had sped passed.

The ute driver was no more to blame than Dunkin' Donuts would have been if they were having a sale and someone had just told the cop all about it over the radio, leading him to make an unsafe U-turn attempt.

[Genestho]

This is the Independent Police Conduct Authority report on the Crash, I'm not sure if it's been posted here before, I have not read all of the thread..

http://www.ipca.govt.nz/includes/dow...aspx?ID=115160

Pursuant to section 27(1) of the Independent Police Conduct Authority Act 1988 (the Act),
the Authority has formed the opinion that:

- Officer A’s decision to attempt a u-turn just below the brow of a hill and in an area where the speed limit was 100 kph was highly undesirable and notes its lawfulness is subject to adjudication by the Court; and

- the Police decision to lay criminal charges against Officer A [dangerous driving causing death and injury] was justified and appropriate.

[Robbo]

I DID read your post and I understood exactly what you were saying. I also thought about it and disagreed with it. If you read my post properly you might have understood what I was saying - the ute speeding didn't MAKE the cop try to turn where he did, it was the cop's decision to turn in a dangerous place and he could have decided something different, even though a ute had sped passed.

The ute driver was no more to blame than Dunkin' Donuts would have been if they were having a sale and someone had just told the cop all about it over the radio, leading him to make an unsafe U-turn attempt.

Yes Mark, we both agree that the U-turn was a dangerous manouvre especially because of it's location but he probably would'nt have attempted it if there had'nt been a speeding vehicle that had just passed towards him. After all, being a traffic patrolman that is his job to catch it. If it had been you or i there then nothing would have happened. I did'nt say that the ute caused the accident but it sure got the officers attention.
On another note, i think that the courts ruling and penalty was rather pathetic given the circumstances and the fact that a life was lost.

Cheers

[Katman]

I don't think it would have mattered 'what' was coming over that hill (speculation) If they had been travelling at the speed limit or slightly above they would have collected Lenihan.

Are you seriously telling us that you can't stop within 120 metres from 100kph on a dry road? (Even taking into account reaction time).

[HenryDorsetCase]

Are you seriously telling us that you can't stop within 120 metres from 100kph on a dry road? (Even taking into account reaction time).

I'm not sure whats reasonable or not. Ima go read some road tests. If I was asked I'd probably say "that sounds about right" but I've never tried to put numbers on it. Is there published data on it ?(apart from magazine road tests?). serious question in case you're wondering.

[pete376403]

Right, Never let the facts get in the way of your cause....

Go and have a good read of the latest Pursuit Policy, interpret, understand it and get back to us.

At what point does a pursuit commence?

[MarkH]

On another note, i think that the courts ruling and penalty was rather pathetic given the circumstances and the fact that a life was lost.

The penalty irks me greatly - had the officer not been involved in an accident and instead caught up to the ute and issued an infringement notice, then the ute driver would have been up for a higher fine. It seems that travelling too fast deserves a higher fine than performing an illegal manoeuvre that leads to the loss of a man's life.

I've had a larger fine for driving along the motorway in perfect conditions and I hadn't been involved in the injury or death of anyone. What's the lesson here? Speeding is bad and stupid actions that contribute to the death of someone, not as bad?