Cop U-turn accident victim on Campbell tonight (19 December)

[scumdog]

Its The police are no longer seen as angels the way they once were, or as indeed they wish to be. Their halos have slipped and its going to take a lot of work to fix that.

I haven't got a halo, it hasn't slipped and I'm not going to do anything to fix it.

[MSTRS:Me]

I haven't got a halo, it hasn't slipped and I'm not going to do anything to fix it.

Don't pull on that thread tho....your cardy will unravel.

[Sanx]

So, judging by the above post the cop will dust his hands off, shrug his shoulders and jump into another (unbent) car and carry on his merry way without hinderance or penalty?

That's exactly what did happen. He was back in an unbent car patrolling the same roads just two days later. The least the cops could have done is suspended him from traffic duty until the SCU investigation had been completed.

I hate to say it, but that officer has almost given a defense for running.

"sorry officer, I didn't realise that you were pursing me, therefore I was not running. You see, the mirrors on these fandangled sports bikes are useless and I wear earplugs cause the my pipes are just so loud"

Very good point. According to that pratt of a Superintendent, it only becomes a pursuit when the pursuee is aware that he is being chased and has made a conscious decision not to stop. Ignoring the fact that in traffic offences, one is guilty until proven innocent, it would be very hard for a prosecutor to prove that the person being chased was actually aware of it, unless the pursuee had specifically acknowledged the chasing officer and indicated his intention to run.

[Movistar]

I guess the question that has to be asked is if a member of the public decided to do a U turn in that exact spot where the cop decided to and two bikers crashed into him/her, regardless of the speed they were doing, would that driver face prosecution?

IMO as soon as the officer decided to 'pursue' the alleged speeding motorcyclist, irrelevant of whether said biker realised he was going to be pursued or not, is when the pursuit started.
As it happens it's also where the pursuit ended.

Surely commensense would prevail and the first thing to ask himself would be "Is it safe to pursue this offender given the circumstances?"

[Boob Johnson]

I guess they got that idea off the General Public eh?

The difference being an individual isn't representing anything other than himself. The police officer is however representing something rather important. Now you know im not a rabid police hater Scummy, quite the opposite but sometimes it's good to say your sorry when you have fucked up.

Hate the way the officer answered the questions, we don't want to hear a politicians walk around answer (criticize the spelling instead of answering the question). Surely there are guidelines for engaging in potential "pursuits" (and if not, well there still are for everyone when it comes to pulling U-turns). The guy's not calling for your head, just an apology and an assurance no-one else will suffer the same fate

Exactly Squigs, not asking for heads to roll, just front up like a man, apologise & move on.

I guess the question that has to be asked is if a member of the public decided to do a U turn in that exact spot where the cop decided to and two bikers crashed into him/her, regardless of the speed they were doing, would that driver face prosecution?

IMO as soon as the officer decided to 'pursue' the alleged speeding motorcyclist, irrelevant of whether said biker realised he was going to be pursued or not, is when the pursuit started.
As it happens it's also where the pursuit ended.

Surely common sense would prevail and the first thing to ask himself would be "Is it safe to pursue this offender given the circumstances?"

A lil over zealous chasing his quota maybe?

[Timber020]

I guess the question that has to be asked is if a member of the public decided to do a U turn in that exact spot where the cop decided to and two bikers crashed into him/her, regardless of the speed they were doing, would that driver face prosecution?

Sadly my guess is that they wouldnt, the rate of prosecution IMHO is far to low when a car causes an accident involving a bike. We see and hear about this again and again and again and again and again.

We are second class road users in the eyes of the law

[Coldrider]

Sadly my guess is that they wouldnt, the rate of prosecution IMHO is far to low when a car causes an accident involving a bike. We see and hear about this again and again and again and again and again.

We are second class road users in the eyes of the law

Yes, but we're higher up the foodchain than boy racers.

[Winston001]

I hate to say it, but that officer has almost given a defence for running.

"Sorry officer, I didn't realise that you were pursing me, therefore I was not running. You see, the mirrors on these fandangled sports bikes are useless and I wear earplugs cause the my pipes are just so loud"

Oh dear - Failing to keep a proper lookout, failing to operate a vehicle in a roadworthy condition.......

[Winston001]

I guess the question that has to be asked is if a member of the public decided to do a U turn in that exact spot where the cop decided to and two bikers crashed into him/her, regardless of the speed they were doing, would that driver face prosecution?

I think they would - careless use causing injury and there has to be a strong prospect that will happen.

Surely commensense would prevail and the first thing to ask himself would be "Is it safe to pursue this offender given the circumstances?"

Agreed except the question is "Is it safe to do a three point turn at this point or do I proceed a bit further to a safer spot down the road?"

[Winston001]

You sure about that? I don't doubt that things have changed as a result of those prosecutions, but the only reason the prosecutions happened in the first place was because of persistent rumours and a journalist who sniffed out a story.

Fair enough, I don't know why Louise Nicholas allegations were finally taken seriously - not that the jury believed her.

All I do know is that organisations like the Police which prosecute their own members tend to be very zealous in such prosecutions. That is because they hold themselves to a higher standard than applied to the general public and turn on "bad" members with a vengance.

The TV shows where "Internal Affairs" are viewed with loathing by cops is very real and shows the attitude these internal investigators have. No mercy.

[MSTRS:Me]

Fair enough, I don't know why Louise Nicholas allegations were finally taken seriously - not that the jury believed her.

All I do know is that organisations like the Police which prosecute their own members tend to be very zealous in such prosecutions. That is because they hold themselves to a higher standard than applied to the general public and turn on "bad" members with a vengance.

The TV shows where "Internal Affairs" are viewed with loathing by cops is very real and shows the attitude these internal investigators have. No mercy.

Yep, if IA get to hear of the problem in the first place....

[Usarka]

I guess the question that has to be asked is if a member of the public decided to do a U turn in that exact spot where the cop decided to and two bikers crashed into him/her, regardless of the speed they were doing, would that driver face prosecution?

Yes they would be charged.

Even if the bikers were speeding or being dangerous themselves, doing a u-turn on a corner is dangerous.

Barring any valid mitigating circumstances, if he isn't charged then there will be another nail in the coffin of belief that law makers and enforcers in NZ are treated the same as everyone else.