Police killing us again!

[Robert Taylor]

On most occasions yes. On this occasion what chance did Paul have?

People are angry, and it stems from empathy, if you imagine yourself in the role of the motorcyclcist, whether you are doing 70 km/h or 127 km/h, on that day, do you really think it would matter if you crested the hill and there was a blue & white in the middle of a 3 point turn?

If you were in your cage, and you were doing a 3 point turn in that location, and another road user died, do you think that you would be able to avoid responsibility by talking about a speeding ute that you didn't even know the colour of? Do you think you would avoid prosecution?

I have been in this exact situation as a motorcyclist and I was doing a speed in excess of the speed limit. The RZ500 was so shortened that it was able to be placed lengthwise on the back of an HQ ute and the tailgate shut. It was adjudged as the other parties fault as there was enough clear distance to see me irrespective of the speed I was travelling.
But if I hadnt have been speeding maybe I could have had enough time to react, SPEED WAS A FACTOR!!!!
My fortune was that I was thrown clear.
I have complete respect for the policeman who was on the scene to he;p me prior to the arrival of the ambulance

[Smifffy]

In all cases, by guestimate. Then once formed it is a matter of who's op[inion carries more weight in court.

Hint-- It wont be yours

I was hoping for one of our enforcement brethren, or their supporters to answer my question, but thanks anyway.

The answer I was expecting is that it is up to the issuing officer's JUDGEMENT

We, the taxpayers are employing the public servants, including the members of the Police Force to enforce the LAW of New Zealand, with good judgement. Whether it be a Judge ruling on dodgy finance dealings, a cop driving unsafely, or an MP doing house renovations.

[MSTRS:Me]

It's 4m/10kmh, to a max of 70kmh. You are then legally allowed to follow at 28m at any speed above that.

Perhaps MaxPreload made a typo? Whatever, guesstimating distance is an exercise in futility for most. The 2 second rule is much better.
Surely everyone can count One/One Thousand...Two/One Thousand, using a (anything stationary beside the road) as a point of reference?

[Smifffy]

I have been in this exact situation as a motorcyclist and I was doing a speed in excess of the speed limit. The RZ500 was so shortened that it was able to be placed lengthwise on the back of an HQ ute and the tailgate shut. It was adjudged as the other parties fault as there was enough clear distance to see me irrespective of the speed I was travelling.
But if I hadnt have been speeding maybe I could have had enough time to react, SPEED WAS A FACTOR!!!!
My fortune was that I was thrown clear.
I have complete respect for the policeman who was on the scene to he;p me prior to the arrival of the ambulance

Speed was a factor, but it was the other party's fault.

[Smifffy]

I have been in this exact situation as a motorcyclist and I was doing a speed in excess of the speed limit. The RZ500 was so shortened that it was able to be placed lengthwise on the back of an HQ ute and the tailgate shut. It was adjudged as the other parties fault as there was enough clear distance to see me irrespective of the speed I was travelling.
But if I hadnt have been speeding maybe I could have had enough time to react, SPEED WAS A FACTOR!!!!
My fortune was that I was thrown clear.
I have complete respect for the policeman who was on the scene to he;p me prior to the arrival of the ambulance

I have a great deal of respect for many policemen. How did you feel about the guy in the car?

[MSTRS:Me]

Given that there are 20 demerit points at stake (and a whole lot more at stake if you buy into the reason fro the rule). How exactly is this 28m determined?

That is the distance you will travel in 2 seconds at 100kph.
Very hard to judge in distance terms.

[scumdog]

why ask you scummy?

because you're a cop and in the past you've held hands with your brother coppers to obfuscate, divert and lie about the statement

i'm inviting you, as a cop, to have an honest debate: but i'm not holding my breath

I ain't getting involved.

Why?

Because I would probably not give the answers you like.

And you would twist them to suit your own agenda.

[MarkH]

Everyone will get pissed off and call for change but in reality there already is a law which is you must be able to stop in half your visual distance at all times. I think everyone is at fault.

The cop shouldnt of made a uturn where he did.
The biker waqs probably going to quick.
The Ute shouldnt of been speeding in the first place.

First its there should be no camera's cause it revenue generating
then its cops should not persue speeding vehicles because its dangerous to everyone.
really all everyone is saying "let us speed".

I wouldn't deny the cop's right to chase speeding vehicles, but if they could turn around to do so without being a hazard and killing other motorists then that would be a bonus

The cop shouldnt of made a uturn where he did.
No he shouldn't have, in fact that error directly contributed to a man dying - that is not acceptable!!!

The biker was probably going to quick.
Maybe - but that is only speculation.
If he was then that would also have contributed to his death, but since he has already be penalised way too severely then surely you wouldn't suggest that he needs to be punished further?

The Ute shouldnt of been speeding in the first place.
No, it shouldn't have been - but what is your point? It better not be that if you speed in a ute then you deserve to have your mate on a motorcycle killed by an over zealous cop! Clearly the cop should have driven about 100 metres further along the road, then turned around safely and pursued the ute - giving out the standard fine & demerit points as proscribed by law, but that is not what happened here!

but in reality there already is a law which is you must be able to stop in half your visual distance at all times
No, that is not in reality at all. The reality is that on a marked road you must be able to stop in the distance you can see (not half the distance). I don't think that the punishment for failing to do that should be death. I also don't think that the police should be blocking the road to enforce that law. If it was a cow instead of a cop car then there would be questions asked about why a cow was standing in the middle of the road - the owner of the cow could be charged for not taking adequate steps to fence his livestock. If it was a car broken down and blocking the road had been unintentional and unavoidable then there may have been no charges and no one blamed - but this was a deliberate choice to turn a police car around in a dangerous spot causing a hazard that lead to the death of a person, from our understanding of what happened many of us are not very happy with the actions of the police here!

[MarkH]

I am aware of the 2 second rule...It replaced the 'old' method of 1 car length/10mph.
But never heard of 4 metres /100kph.
4m is about the length of an average car.
How would anyone stop in that distance?

He probably accidentally gave the standard following distance for driving on the Auckland motorways. Everyone knows that 4 metres is more than enough for motorway driving!

[Smifffy]

That is the distance you will travel in 2 seconds at 100kph.
Very hard to judge in distance terms.

What do you think the chances are of successfully defending an infringement notice by claiming that you were most definitely 29m behind the vehicle in front?

As per the earlier hint, 1 party will be believed, and it wont be you.

An in car camera could help prove it - but that's too expensive

[marty]

Given that there are 20 demerit points at stake (and a whole lot more at stake if you buy into the reason fro the rule). How exactly is this 28m determined?

Actually - I just did some research, and the regulation has been amended, as here:

9 Stopping and following distances

• (1) A driver must not drive a vehicle in a lane marked on a road at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in the length of the lane that is visible to the driver.
  
  (2) A driver must not drive a vehicle on a road that is not marked in lanes at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in half the length of roadway that is visible to the driver.
  
  (3) A driver must not drive on a road a vehicle following behind another vehicle so that the driver cannot stop the driver's vehicle short of the vehicle ahead if the vehicle ahead stops suddenly.
  
  (4) No driver may drive a motor vehicle on any road following behind another vehicle at a distance behind that vehicle of less than—
  
  • (a) 16 m, if his or her speed is 40 km an hour or more but less than 50 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (b) 20 m, if his or her speed is 50 km an hour or more but less than 60 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (c) 24 m, if his or her speed is 60 km an hour or more but less than 70 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (d) 28 m, if his or her speed is 70 km an hour or more but less than 80 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (e) 32 m, if his or her speed is 80 km an hour or more but less than 90 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (f) 36 m, if his or her speed is 90 km an hour or more
    

[marty]

What do you think the chances are of successfully defending an infringement notice by claiming that you were most definitely 29m behind the vehicle in front?

Pretty good.

[Smifffy]

Actually - I just did some research, and the regulation has been amended, as here:

9 Stopping and following distances

• (1) A driver must not drive a vehicle in a lane marked on a road at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in the length of the lane that is visible to the driver.
  
  (2) A driver must not drive a vehicle on a road that is not marked in lanes at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in half the length of roadway that is visible to the driver.
  
  (3) A driver must not drive on a road a vehicle following behind another vehicle so that the driver cannot stop the driver's vehicle short of the vehicle ahead if the vehicle ahead stops suddenly.
  
  (4) No driver may drive a motor vehicle on any road following behind another vehicle at a distance behind that vehicle of less than—
  
  • (a) 16 m, if his or her speed is 40 km an hour or more but less than 50 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (b) 20 m, if his or her speed is 50 km an hour or more but less than 60 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (c) 24 m, if his or her speed is 60 km an hour or more but less than 70 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (d) 28 m, if his or her speed is 70 km an hour or more but less than 80 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (e) 32 m, if his or her speed is 80 km an hour or more but less than 90 km an hour; or
  
  
  • (f) 36 m, if his or her speed is 90 km an hour or more
    

Great!!

Who measures these distances to a degree of accuracy that may be relied upon in a court of law?

[MSTRS:Me]

What do you think the chances are of successfully defending an infringement notice by claiming that you were most definitely 29m behind the vehicle in front?

As per the earlier hint, 1 party will be believed, and it wont be you.

Well, I'd assume I was fucked. Because if my vehicle was up to standard (brakes/tyres) and I was paying attention, then TPTB say I should have been able to stop in time. Demonstrably, I didn't stop so I would be charged with Failing to stop within the clear road ahead. Possibly with Careless (lack of attention). Maybe even Operating a defective vehicle.

[Smifffy]

Well, I'd assume I was fucked. Because if my vehicle was up to standard (brakes/tyres) and I was paying attention, then TPTB say I should have been able to stop in time. Demonstrably, I didn't stop so I would be charged with Failing to stop within the clear road ahead. Possibly with Careless (lack of attention). Maybe even Operating a defective vehicle.

But surely if the issuing officer was present, and was pursuing a policy of improved road safety, then you would have been stopped and issued with the infringement notice prior to colliding with the vehicle/object in front?

Waiting till after the crash to throw the book at you doesn't really do much to improve road safety does it?