U-turn cop to stand trial

[Conquiztador]

I suspect that Bridgeman's orders may have been "Ensure that you ticket speeding vehicles regardless of circumstances". He tried to comply.

Surely that is a Troll???

[Winston001]

Surely that is a Troll???

No no, its an Ixion. Looks similar to a Troll but more sarcastic

[cowpatz]

Let me spell it out to you.

Taking a corner at 95kph that you would need to be doing 30kph in order to stop within the distance visible to you is not 'safe'. You might do it 99 times out of 100 and get away with it thereby making you believe that it is 'safe'. However, that 1 time out of 100 when things turn to shit you have to accept a large part of the responsibility for that shit.

Do you honestly believe that? I would expect any driver to know that doing a U turn after a corner is just blatantly stupid. For a cop to do it just demonstrates to me that he thinks he is above the law and can do as he thinks fit and where he sees fit. In this case it is quite clear, as the court has acknowledged, that he fucked up. As a rider and a driver you have to assume that other drivers have at least a basic understanding as to the responsibilities of handling a vehicle. None of us can see around corners. Unless you park and walk it first then whatever the speed you take the corner at will have an element of risk attached.

[Katman]

Do you honestly believe that?

Of course I fucking believe it. I wouldn't have said it if I didn't.

None of us can see around corners.

Exactly. What if it was a tree fallen across the road instead of a police car?

If you can't stop within the visible distance then you have to assume some (and sometimes all) of the responsiblity for the accident.

Unless you park and walk it first then whatever the speed you take the corner at will have an element of risk attached.

Bullshit.

[Ixion]

No no, its an Ixion. Looks similar to a Troll but more sarcastic

No. Not a troll

We know that cops have a quota. And have been told very very emphatically "no discretion for speeding". "Anyone speeding gets a ticket". And we may suspect that Bridgman wasn't very popular with his bosses (cos they turned on him real quick). So, he sees the first bike blatting through at warp speed. Thinks, maybe, something like "Shit, he's way over. Wodda I do. Hell, the boss is already tearing me a new one about not making quota. And giving me the 'no discretion' spiel. if someone *555s that guy, and I haven't picked him up, the boss'll toast me. No turnoffs on this road, can't say I didn't see him. gotta turn round and get after him".

Not to excuse him, i've seen that road and only an idiot or an optimist would try a three pointer on it. Bad judgement, very bad judgement on his part. But, I still reckon the anti-speeding crusading zealotry of the police high command should take some of the blame. If the attitude from the top was more sensible, maybe he'd have thought "Shall i turn round and chase him - Nah , not here too dangerous, let him go"

[cowpatz]

Exactly. What if it was a tree fallen across the road instead of a police car?

If you can't stop within the visible distance then you have to assume some (and sometimes all) of the responsiblity for the accident.

Der yeah. But I dont assume responsibility for some moron doing a u turn. From a practical point of view most of us ride without necessarily being able to come to a complete stop within the visible distance on some corners and dont try and tell me you do. The fact is the court found him guilty...end of story.

[dpex]

He would most likely have gotten off next to scot free if he had immediately expressed remorse for his actions. He was hammered because of his attitude, not for what actually happened.

He deserved everything he got and then some. An officer of the law is there to SERVE AND PROTECT the public. Not put people lives in danger on revenue gathering excersises.

Yeah Mate! Like the fuck-head who killed the cop while he was laying spikes. Oh yeah, he showed remorse as he left the court 'Yeah Right' and got basically five years.

In prison the arsehole will be a bit of a hero on account of he's a cop-killer.

The cunt purposely ran over a cop doing what cops do to save your scrawny arse and mine from the real evil-doers, and got done for man-slaughter.

The max penalty for such is life in prison. This shit got 8.5 yrs, with parole in 5.

In other words he'll be out in 5, and while he's in he'll be a bit of a fucking hero.

[dpex]

No. Not a troll

We know that cops have a quota. And have been told very very emphatically "no discretion for speeding". "Anyone speeding gets a ticket". And we may suspect that Bridgman wasn't very popular with his bosses (cos they turned on him real quick). So, he sees the first bike blatting through at warp speed. Thinks, maybe, something like "Shit, he's way over. Wodda I do. Hell, the boss is already tearing me a new one about not making quota. And giving me the 'no discretion' spiel. if someone *555s that guy, and I haven't picked him up, the boss'll toast me. No turnoffs on this road, can't say I didn't see him. gotta turn round and get after him".

Not to excuse him, i've seen that road and only an idiot or an optimist would try a three pointer on it. Bad judgement, very bad judgement on his part. But, I still reckon the anti-speeding crusading zealotry of the police high command should take some of the blame. If the attitude from the top was more sensible, maybe he'd have thought "Shall i turn round and chase him - Nah , not here too dangerous, let him go"

That's a fucking good post, Ix. Good on ya.

[dpex]

So what over his 30 years he made 1000's of good decisions to protect us and makes one mistake...same for pilot...he would probably get suspended and reviewed but he / she is responsible for more than a cop is as well as more highly trained..We will have to agree to disagree because that is a very draconian view of life...

Good post GB.

[dpex]

Perhaps it is draconian. But it also comes down to trust and respect. I want to be able to trust that the police makes the right decisions. Every time! If they are only expected to make same decisions and mistakes as we would in same situation, then the respect goes away.

Just because he has made 1000's of good ones does not give him the right to make a bad decision. Each decision is measured on its own merit not on what has happened in the past.

You were brought up in a world of fairy tales and Disney, right?

Jesus H Christ! I fear for this nation where souls on the one side excuse their own every imperfection with ...not my fault....nobody told me... its was the Devil made me do it...I was...it was...things were, etc.

On the one hand such souls hold the cops out to be perfect, yet on the other they slag them whenever a cop takes exception to an action of the aggrieved.

Bastard-cops and perfect cops is he world's originally oxymoron.

[dpex]

Actions speak louder than words!

How did those kiddes go at Puke anyway? I note you were keen to post the idea, but I missed the followup on your action.

August is the time. Got a contingent of four. Should be a good day.

[dpex]

That is true. But it does not wash.

When we are studying we are secure in the knowledge that the people doing the education has a higher level of knowledge then we have, they have degrees, masters etc that are far above what we are at that time trying to achieve.

In same fashion I would expect an officer of the law to know right from wrong and be a much better judge of risks then I am. If you are telling me that he does not have this knowledge (or even is expected to have it) then he is just another guy with more power then others. And that is not how it works. Any job we take comes with responibility. If you are not up to it, dont take the job.

And here we see the product of successful social engineering which asserts, "I have no mind, no will. I do as I am told."

Jesus, but Hitler would have loved to have met you, sony.

[dpex]

What part of "being able to stop within the distance visible to you" don't you understand?

I read this and had to almost puke; mainly because the site's resident holier than-thou, pedant is correct.

But who takes any notice of the rule? Few. We mostly tool around the highways and byways in the supreme belief that 'it' ( a crash) will never happen to us, coupled to the other supreme belief that we will be able to stop in time anyway.

Tell that to the two guys who hit Mr Bridgen's car. And they did, because they failed to observe the lawful rule of traveling at a speed enabling them to stop within half of the clear distance ahead.

Which then brings us to a consideration of fault.

The law quire clearly states that one must travel at a speed enabling one to stop within 'half' of the clear road ahead.

So why is Mr Bridgens the only one to catch the flak? Why have not the two, so-called victims not been hauled up for failing to observe that rule?

[Katman]

and dont try and tell me you do.

Really? Well hang on to your hat 'cos that's exactly what I do.

[cs363]

Really? Well hang on to your hat 'cos that's exactly what I do.

X 2 on that. Although I have to admit that probably (actually, if I'm honest) that wasn't the case when I was younger and going through my 'indestructable' stage of youth. Luckily for me I survived, largely assisted no doubt by lower traffic volumes back then.