Cop charged with dangerous driving while responding to an urgent job

[SPman]

Would you say "Whats the f**kin problem?" then?

Things only become a problem, if you let them.

[rwh]

Was I trolling...? How did I go? I didn't even realise... Huh???

Sorry, that was more a response to scumdog. If trolling is an attempt to get people to rave about (discuss) something they don't know enough about, then it probably was.

My point was that he was complaining that we don't have enough evidence to say that the cop was driving safely - we also don't have enough evidence (on here) to say that he wasn't. If we need evidence before we express an opinion, then pretty much nobody here has the right to an opinion on this matter. Note I haven't expressed one ...

Maybe this was dangerous driving; maybe it wasn't. I wasn't there, and there certainly wasn't enough info in your post to suggest it was safe.

If, on the other hand, you're trying to claim that dangerous driving is acceptable in the case of an emergency - that it's worth knocking over a couple more people to get to the 11 already injured - then I disagree.

Richard

[madandy]

I don't really understand the point of all this 'trolling/fishing'!

From statements made by a local and by Cops the speed travelled along the road in question was pretty fair.
I can't imagine too many greater emergencies than injured kids in a school bus.

I've had my dealings with Police that didn't go my way...I dislike the level of resources spent on speed but thats govt./ltsa policy not the cops choosing to chase us round the twisties rather than waiting to be called for true crime.

Give these guys a break FFS! They are motorcyclists, Kiwi bikers even.

If someone wrongly gave my mates ,or collegues in my industry shit, I'd sure as hell stand up for them too.

[MSTRS:Me]

Biased??
Sure we ALL are.

You speak for yourself, young man. The rest of us just generalise.

[Winston001]

Ok, decision released. The original charge was "driving at a dangerous speed" - not proven. However the Judge did convict the officer on the lesser charge of "driving at excess speed".

The Judge then considered the circumstances for sentencing and discharged the officer without conviction. So no conviction at all.

A win for common sense.

[The Stranger:Me]

If we need evidence before we express an opinion, then pretty much nobody here has the right to an opinion on this matter. Note I haven't expressed one ...

Um, well, actually you did. You expressed an opinion about peoples opinions.

[madandy]

Ok, decision released. The original charge was "driving at a dangerous speed" - not proven. However the Judge did convict the officer on the lesser charge of "driving at excess speed".

The Judge then considered the circumstances for sentencing and discharged the officer without conviction. So no conviction at all.

A win for common sense.

Bloody good job.

[mstriumph]

...................
The 'what if' or 'maybe' factor is what makes things wrong to start with. Not every drink driver or speeder kills/injures someone, but the 'what if' or 'maybe' factor is what makes them a problem.

that's life, innit? a process of weighing potential risks against desireable outcomes ......... lighten up, bro - we ALL do it

[Patrick]

If, on the other hand, you're trying to claim that dangerous driving is acceptable in the case of an emergency - that it's worth knocking over a couple more people to get to the 11 already injured - then I disagree.

Richard

Opps... I didn't realise anyone was hit...

His speed was caught on a camera... no complaints whatsoever... a photo...

Trolling aside... the point I was making is this...


Do I speed to your rescue, or cruise along at the normal speed for fear of being prosecuted for dangerous speed.

Personally, I will still get there as fast and as safe as I can... (Sill no driving complaints in 21 years of "rapid response" work).

[davereid]

Do I speed to your rescue, or cruise along at the normal speed for fear of being prosecuted for dangerous speed.

Just keep your lights on and get to me at or just above the legal speed limit. No point joining the dozens of cops who crash their car, injure themselves or someone else every year. Fire and ambo have to drive safely, so should the plice.

[Patrick]

Just keep your lights on and get to me at or just above the legal speed limit. No point joining the dozens of cops who crash their car, injure themselves or someone else every year. Fire and ambo have to drive safely, so should the plice.

If it is burglars, my lights will not be on... I wanna catch em, not advertise my pending arrival.

Fire and Ambo crashes occur, been to some myself, but since there is less of em (vehicles I mean), they are not as obvious.

The point is always getting there without creating carnage or complaint... as the Invercargill cop did... but look what happened to him.

Let me know your home address so I can advise the troops to cruise to your place at 51kmph next time you get burgled (or worse...).
BIG P/T here...

[madandy]

If you expect cops to amble along a legal or "...just above..." legal speeds they are just gonna cruise along with the traffic flow and only overtake if traffic is below posted limits and pulls over. Sometimes cops need to drive very quickly just to to make up for time lost waiting for useless twats to move their shitheaps to the side of the road...
As for Ambo's & big red trucks diving safely, they kinda have too dude. You try driving one quickly, they aint exactly race cars...Fire trucks DO get rolled.

[Skyryder]

Ok, decision released. The original charge was "driving at a dangerous speed" - not proven. However the Judge did convict the officer on the lesser charge of "driving at excess speed".

The Judge then considered the circumstances for sentencing and discharged the officer without conviction. So no conviction at all.

A win for common sense.

Like I said in my post deju vu.

Skyryder

[jimbo600]

If it is burglars, my lights will not be on... I wanna catch em, not advertise my pending arrival.

Fire and Ambo crashes occur, been to some myself, but since there is less of em (vehicles I mean), they are not as obvious.

The point is always getting there without creating carnage or complaint... as the Invercargill cop did... but look what happened to him.

Let me know your home address so I can advise the troops to cruise to your place at 51kmph next time you get burgled (or worse...).
BIG P/T here...

End of the day I guess it comes down to the situation at hand. You guys know what your doing, undergo heaps of training and make a proper decision at the time. A bit like when I pull the occasional wheelie.

I'm glad the officer down south wasn't done.

[Skyryder]

The 'facts' as gleamed by myself smell of a 'stitch-up' job.

But them everybody will say I'm biased.

(What do KBers say when I agree with the Joe Citizen point of view agaist Police? so far on each occassion it's been a fat nothing on the public forum but afew green reps and + comments were forwarded.)

Biased??
Sure we ALL are.

I'd be 'gleaming' too if I walked away from 115kmph in a 50 k zone without a conviction.

This sort of decision by the Judge will one day be the cause of a seriouse accident. It only reinforces the idea that the Police are immune from the law that they are sworn to uphold........not only within the police culture but society at large. There just is no other way to say it.

The vibes are out there floating around when you agree with us SD. It's the wave length that gets weaker the further south you go. Blame it on the ozone hole.

Yep we are all biased but us Cantabs have turned it into part of our culture that is the envy of all NZ: one eyed. I am continually trying to educating the KB community on its merrits.

Then there was the cop who suffered from arrested development. When at last he made a collar he insisted that the perp be transfered to the K9 Unit.


Skyryder