The drink/driving cop

**Jantar** · 4th August 2006, 22:27

Originally Posted by scumdog

BTW, Drunk 7 bottles of 7% Fighting Cock Bourbons tonight, blew 389 so that gives you an indication of drinks vs alcohol levels.

(I'm a 53year-old lardy-arse Harley rider that has had no tea so far, ya better put that into the equation)

Your way ahead of me, I'm only 2/3 of the way through a bottle of Merlot.

**scumdog** · 4th August 2006, 22:28

Originally Posted by WINJA

they need to throw the book at that pig and make an example of him , when i went to court one of the guys b4 me was in there for driving while disqualified , he was pulled up driving his very sick wife to hospital , the judge said no excuses you coulda taken a taxi and convicted him

Quite ferkin right, the dumb-arse SHOULD have called a taxi, what was he doing getting married to somebody who was sick anyway????.

**scumdog** · 4th August 2006, 22:30

Originally Posted by Jantar

Your way ahead of me, I'm only 2/3 of the way through a bottle of Merlot.

Good shit Malcolm, too many people on this site that rant don't even have the excuse that they have been drinking so they're not qualified to post on a Friday night anyway, who the hell do they think they are???!!

**scumdog** · 4th August 2006, 22:34

Originally Posted by Winston001

According to Closeup, his level was 120. Not high, not low. He was off-duty, played golf and was in the bar afterwards. Call came in about a bad crash 2km away. He waited thinking the ambo would arrive............but it didn't. So he took his Police vehicle with all of the crash rescue equipment (defribrillator, oxygen, etc) to the accident and did a good job.

Now, this man may have broken the law but the police do have a discretion in many situations to not lay a charge. Why that didn't happen here is anyones guess. I guess the only good thing is that the police heirarchy can point to this as an example of no favouritism.

Still sucks.

106 was the level so I've been told.

Trouble is, if he gets shown 'discretion' then every other brainless piss-head will come forward with a pathetic excuse as to why they should be shown 'discretion', i.e. 'my cat was sick and I had to get it to the vet'. Losers.

**Mrs Busa Pete** · 5th August 2006, 07:25

Originally Posted by scumdog

106 was the level so I've been told.

Trouble is, if he gets shown 'discretion' then every other brainless piss-head will come forward with a pathetic excuse as to why they should be shown 'discretion', i.e. 'my cat was sick and I had to get it to the vet'. Losers.

Sorry not the same the cat can die.Not sure who you are calling a loser but i for one would support the officer and wouldn't call he a loser i would call him dedicated to his job.It must be hard to be a country cop are you supposed to stick to drink tea @ coffee and be on duty 24/7.Would you do that.

**scumdog** · 5th August 2006, 08:23

Originally Posted by busa pete

Sorry not the same the cat can die.Not sure who you are calling a loser but i for one would support the officer and wouldn't call he a loser i would call him dedicated to his job.It must be hard to be a country cop are you supposed to stick to drink tea @ coffee and be on duty 24/7.Would you do that.

'Losers' was aimed at those that come up with pathetic excuses as to why they screwed-up.

Been-there, done-that in a small station, either working or on call for a whole week at a time except for two 8-hour dayshifts, was that way every second week.
A real drag I can tell you.

**hurricane_r** · 5th August 2006, 08:34

i think it was slighlty innocent, surely u cant be sober 24/7 , ,

**scumdog** · 5th August 2006, 08:38

Originally Posted by hurricane_r

he should be burned at the stake,!!!, iv been hit up twice now, and he should make a good example!

Twice! Are you some kind of slow learner?

And where has your caps key gone, did WINJA take it?

**hurricane_r** · 5th August 2006, 09:06

yes slow learner, learnt my lesson the second time, from reading your posts u use the caps key more than anyone here, anyway im off to piha, have fun

**Grahameeboy** · 5th August 2006, 09:28

Originally Posted by hurricane_r

i think it was slighlty innocent, surely u cant be sober 24/7 , ,

It is a difficult one eh.....as the only cop who knows he is never off duty I guess it could be argued that he has to be a good boy.....on other hand I guess he needs his own space too but then that is nature of his job.....tough one

I don't think he should lose his job though. If the accident had not happened he would have stayed at home.......it was not like he intentionally drank and drove if you know what I mean.............but he knew the law, he had been drinking so the question is could he have got a neighbour to drive him.....again easy for us to say......

I guess there has to be a message though.

**Ozzie** · 5th August 2006, 09:59

Originally Posted by Swoop

He did the right thing, but...
On the news tonight it said they were drinking at the officers home. The media will probably move from the "he did right" chant, towards the "he shouldn't have let his mate drive in that condition" mode.

Sorry?

The guy in the crash was drinking at the officer's home?

if that is correct, was the injured driver over the limit? If yes and yes, then the cop should be slammed. Responsible host, drink driver, good job he saved the guy, but the guy wouldn't be in the possition if the cop had have done what all good hosts should.

All that said, it is speculative, I don't know the back ground.

If it wasn't as above, I think the officer still needs to found guilty of drink driving, but without punishment. He broke the law, that is simple, he should be held accountable, however, his actions saved someones life, that should be mitigating when it comes to punishment.

If that isn't done, it sends the message that under some circumstances it is ok to drink drive, where quite simply it is not.

I don't think he should be sacked though, which I understand is the norm if a cop is found guilty of an offense. (only if the victim was not at the cops place, or in the company of the cop prior to the accident)

**Ixion** · 5th August 2006, 10:07

Said in the Harold today that the cop who pinged him was Highway Patrol. Figures.

And the commissioner's office wonders why there's a staff retention problem.
Esprit de what woz that again?

Guess that HP guy better pray like hell that he doesn't ever stop a carload of heavies who turn nasty on him. Sort of think that the backup might be rather slow responding.

**Ozzie** · 5th August 2006, 10:09

Originally Posted by Big McJim

Hang on a minute - if the 2nd cop got there 20 minutes after the 1st cop then the 1st cop wouldn't have been driving at the time as he would have parked up some 20 minutes earlier.

And presumably had 20 minutes for his BAC to have lowered, add to that the time actually at the accident, then the other 40 minutes to get back to the station for the evidential, so he would have had at least an hour, if not 2.

So, every likelyhood he would have been much higher when he actually was driving.

**crazybigal** · 5th August 2006, 10:12

with all the shit about cops in the news, how can they not chuck the book at him! the powers above wont give a shit about him, its damage control time boys! hes fucked!!
Myself i think he did the right thing, but there is no way they can let him off scott free for it. I wouldnt want him to loose his job over it. how would you feel if you lost your job cos you got busted drink driving?
Maybe only let him drive on duty and make him pay his debt to the community in some way rather than giving money to the courts.
the town is lucky to have a cop! if it was in the city then yeah there is no way he would have been in that situation