Whangarei Police chase

[MikeL]

And so the debate goes on, with no sign of either side giving way. On the one hand, uncompromising insistence on law enforcement and personal responsibility for all the consequences of one's actions, and on the other an assertion that the chain of causality and culpability is more complex, and that the police can and do make mistakes.

I would just like to add two points, and then I will say no more - we can agree to disagree.

First, "collateral damage": this is a euphemism, a weasel phrase that tries to hide the reality of either cynical sacrifice for some presumed greater good or simple bad judgement.

Second, if the police had had any reason to suspect that the rider in question was a serial rapist and/or murderer, perhaps their actions might have been easier to justify.

I still maintain that the punishment (of all involved, including families) did not fit the crime.

But, hey, that's just my opinion.

[Lou Girardin]

You're right, Mike. But it woke everyone up, didn't it?
I recall one time a cop flagged away a chase before it started though. He was leaving the Ellerslie Motorway Patrol office late one Sunday afternoon, a Ferrari went past so fast that he couldn't read the plate. He saw him go under the Ellerslie interchange. But when he got to the Penrose Rd overbridge, there was no Ferrari to be seen. Cop was on a bike, so it didn't take him long to get up to speed. Bugger!
Lou

[jrandom]

Originally posted by Lou Girardin
I'm argueing for a ban on high speed chases for minor offences, which speeding is
...
The actions of three idiots, the rider and two cops, caused the death of an innocent girl, anyone of the three could have prevented this.

It seems to me that everyone here is making the implicit assumption that the chappie on the Trumf wouldn't have crossed the centerline if he wasn't being chased. Not sure that's valid, really. Surely the poor state of the road at that point would've had far more to do with the crash than the guy being spooked due to the chase.

As a practical point, I can't see how to go about banning pursuits for 'minor' traffic offenses. Stipulating that the offender would receive a ticket in the post would require the cop in question to establish evidence that the person ticketed did, in fact, do the naughty stuff alleged, and the cop didn't just see them drive past legally, invent some random bad behaviour and 'ticket' them for it. Cameras, perhaps? Too complex, you'd need a 'camera operator' cop in all the patrol cars. The 'pull them over and hand them a ticket' method solves the problem neatly. And it's never any good putting wooly ideas like 'due caution' into the law, really... where the determinism?

For that matter, the idea of letting people get away with traffic infringements if they don't stop immediately after committing the offense would be anathema to 95% of the population.

My personal opinion? If you're riding a bike and you bugger up a corner and two people die, it's YOUR FAULT. Period. Sorry. The cops didn't shunt him into the girl's car, did they?

And don't anybody take the above paragraph as support for the more general 'road safety' attitude prevalent in the country right now. Just what it says, folks, just what it says...

[bikerboy]

I can't resist these FINAL thoughts.
You can't rationalize an event by "what ifs" that never occured, nor were suspected at the time.

The presumption the biker wouldn't have crossed the line is based on odds. Speeding most likely would not have caused him to lose control as he probably wouldn't have been going as fast. Being chased, scared, with adrenalin pumping, increasing speeds, risks taken by impaired decisions, increased the odds of an accident.

A more accurate scenario with the bank robber would be;
bank robbed, thief runs away. police follow firing gun at robber to get him to stop. Stray bullet kill bystander. Is robber responsible?, after all if he hadn't run the police wouldn't have chased him. Or was the action of the police reckless and even predictable given the situation.

The police admitted they pulled out in front of him without warning to get him to stop. If they did this not realizing his speed or the road conditions, both layout and surface, they were even more irresponsible.

Finally, I've never said the biker wasn't responsible, just that the police played a part that contributed to the accident. They should be "man enough" to admit it and appologize, instead of covering it up.

[SPman]

They should be "man enough" to admit it and appologize, instead of covering it up.

Fat chance!        

 Deny all responsibility

It was someone elses fault

After all....that is the New Zealand way!

[marty]

it's not gonna go away any time soon.......

S T U F F S T O R Y

Fatal crash during police pursuit
06 October 2003

Police were pursuing a car when it crashed, killing a man, near Spring Creek on State Highway 1 between Blenheim and Picton today.


Blenheim police Senior Constable Russell Smith said he understood a police patrol had begun a pursuit of the car not long before the crash.

The man, the car's sole occupant, was heading north on SH1 when his car hit a southbound truck and trailer about 1pm.

He died at the scene.

The pursuing police car veered off the road. Two officers in the car were uninjured.

The truck driver was not hurt but was badly shaken, Mr Smith said.

A crash investigation was under way and a Police Complaints Authority investigation would also be done.

The coroner would also investigate.

Police were this afternoon contacting the man's family.

There have been a number of accidents following police pursuits this year.

Recently an investigation found a pursuit of a motorcycle in Northland that ended in two deaths reached "undesirable" speeds but complied with police policy.

The chase on May 12 this year resulted in the deaths of motorcyclist Kuran Brunton, 29, and Erin Burgess, 18.

Ms Burgess was killed when Mr Brunton's motorbike crossed the centre line and collided with the car she was driving.

Meanwhile, the Police Complaints Authority is still investigating the death of a motorcyclist killed after a high-speed police chase on the outskirts of Hastings in July.


http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,2682858a10,00.html

[marty]

here's my last post on this matter. for personal reasons this is something close to my heart. the thing one must ask is WHY was the guy running? was he (or she) drunk, stoned, high on meth (P), carrying a weapon, carrying drugs, on a stolen bike, just beaten someone up, depressed, showing off, etc etc. maybe they just thought that they could outride the cops. the chasing cop has no idea why, but they have a duty to enforce. they will make judgments on the continuation of any pursuit, continuation of any arrest (a few of those have ended up with someone dying too) based on the information they have at the time. for those of you that haven't, put yourselves in the cops' position. at what stage would YOU have pulled out of the pursuit? 180k plus is probably too fast to even initiate a chase, but 145-odd isn't. police policy on pusuits is already pretty tight, after just these types of incidents. an 'elective' pusuit can become an 'imperative' pusuit should the events unfold just so. it's the cops call, just like arresting/ticketing/pepper spraying/shooting someone is - no-one elses, just like the initial speeding offence by triumph dude was

[Nouseforaname]

Could not have said it better marty!

Bike does a runner = cop ( just doing his job ) pursues = bike crashes = cop to blame? i think not

Sure the cops have to decide when to pull out of a chase and yes maybe sometimes they should pull out earlier, and yes sometimes the cops lie about it, but at the end of the day....... if ya do a runner for what ever reason it's your fault!

As i once said in an earlier post..... if any of my family or friends had been a victim of serious crime and i found out the cops where chasing the offender, but decided to pull out of the chase because they were scared of what joe public was gona think.................. id been damn PISSED OFF!

[SPman]

Who is saying the cops are to blame!

Basically, 2 (or 3 or 4..)wrongs dont make a right. Trying to pin blame on one party and exonerating all other parties is not going to solve anything.

Its better that all aspects are looked at and where there are mistakes, errors of judgement etc, made, by everyone, admit them, work out ways of trying to avoid them in the future and move on.

In this current climate of blame, fault, liability, etc, no one is prepared to admit any wrong, police or perpetrator alike, bullshit prevails, smokescreens are drawn, everything is reduced to black and white, - someone to blame/charge and everyone else is lily white!  And the same things then carry on, over and over, because no one, the police in particular, will be honest and say, oops, sorry, I made a stuff up, I'm sorry, we'll look at ways of trying to prevent this from happening again, etc, etc.

I'm sure if the police (and everyone else) were more honest, open and up front,there would be more respect for them, and we wouldnt question every action they are involved in, looking for the coverup!

But that of course, is in another universe!

 

[scumdog]

One feature common to both sides of this argument - we're all operating on 20-20 hindsight and that makes it easy to say "they should have...".
YOU try being the cops involved in this situation, I'll bet at no time did they think somebodies life would end, even the guy on the Triumph and despite what people think cops ain't superhuman - they think and act just like you and me..
As for the Blenhiem scenario, looking at the crashed car it looked like an '84 Corolla, not the kind of vehicle equiped for a high speed getaway! the road looked straight and the weather fine so I wonder what went wrong this time - except for the screaming obvious fact that yet another drongo decided to run rather than face the music.

[Marmoot]

Regardless on "whose fault it is", the real issue lies on balancing between interests in catching the criminal and preventing collateral damage.

Which one is more important? Catching a criminal regardless of cost? Or, let him go today and do what we can to trace him?

There was an old saying that goes: live today to fight again tomorrow.

Of course, police chase is a complex situation that needs to be reviewed case by case. But surely there must be a guidelines (more like Checkpoints) that need to be consulted in order to decide to continue the pursuits or not.
For example, lets do this for every minute the chase is on:
- if the speed goes up to xxx, then stop pursuit.
- if it's public road in daylight, then stop pursuit.
- if other people are likely on the road and the speed goes up to yyy (where yyy < xxx), then stop pursuit.
- if we get the number plate of the offender, then stop pursuit.
- if....
- if....
And if none of those checkpoints are satisfied, then keep on pursuing.

How about that?

But hey, I'm just an IT person (not even....), so, that's my "techie-type" point of view. Will it be valid in politics? Maybe yes, maybe not.....although it COULD be my life at stakes.

For now, I'd just go back to my email checking. Life goes on, and political correctness destroys democracy, kills freedom and segregate people.

[Motoracer]

I am just wondering where UK's solution of police YZF-R1 patrol bikes fits in to this. Could it be a sensible option.... if so, they better put some sensible ex-racers on them to be effective.

Imagine that, that would prevent most people from doing runners. The most biggest reason why people do runners is probably because its not that hard to do it in the first place, specially in rural, twisty, alpine areas with the current police bikes and cars running after the crims.

[Motoracer]

Some examples:

[Lou Girardin]

Just a correction to jrandom's comment. Most traffic offences now carry owner liability. They don't have to identify the rider, just ticket the owner.
Lou

[bikerboy]

This is slightly but I wonder if the police have statistics on the number of people who do a runner and get away with it.

Personally I think the people who try it aren't really thinking, it's a sudden gut reation that they may get away with it. How many really do? We hear about all the failed attempts that end in accidents. One would think that would be enough to deter one from trying.

Perhaps the aggressive policy of chasing is based on far more people trying and succeeding than we ever hear about. There are a lot of urban myths but how many personally know for a fact someone that's done it and lived to tell the tale?