Police killing us again!

**Jack Miller** · 17th August 2011, 09:29

Originally Posted by slowpoke

4. Naming and shaming, career damage, etc had already played a large part in the cop's punishment. Think what you like but he won't be walking tall for a long time to come, possibly ever, after this tragedy.

Good. He should be sacked. We can't have drivers convicted of careless driving causing death in our Highway Patrol.

Plenty of criminals won't be walking tall after their crimes are found out - they still go to jail though.

**Katman** · 17th August 2011, 09:43

Originally Posted by Jack Miller

Your smoko room analysis is wrong. The IPCA report concluded that the rider would have hit the car had he been doing 101kph, which is 3-9kph within the cops' own enforcement tolerance. Perfectly reasonable to expect a cop to drive as if someone was approaching at 101.

Wrong.

The IPCA report states.......

The crash investigator concluded "Calculations show that any speed above 101kph may have been too fast for Mr Brown to stop his vehicle within the distance between first viewpoint and impact area.

Bearing in mind that the comment was from the police crash investigator and not the independent investigator, I read it as a comment simply designed to support the police theory that any speed over 100 kph kills.

Did you also note the part in the report that states that the estimated impact speed was between 93-99kph?

**jellywrestler** · 17th August 2011, 09:53

Originally Posted by Jack Miller

Good. He should be sacked. We can't have drivers convicted of careless driving causing death in our Highway Patrol.

forgive me if I'm wrong but I seem to recall he got off that charge?

**riffer** · 17th August 2011, 10:23

Originally Posted by jellywrestler

forgive me if I'm wrong but I seem to recall he got off that charge?

You're absolutely right Graeme.

He was convicted merely of careless driving.

The judge decided that he did not cause death.

**Jack Miller** · 17th August 2011, 12:25

Originally Posted by jellywrestler

forgive me if I'm wrong but I seem to recall he got off that charge?

Ok, the charge appears to have been "careless use of a motor vehicle." The point remains the same though: there should be no one with such a conviction in the Highway Patrol.

**Parlane** · 17th August 2011, 14:05

Originally Posted by Jack Miller

Ok, the charge appears to have been "careless use of a motor vehicle." The point remains the same though: there should be no one with such a conviction in the Highway Patrol.

To be fair, he has been taken off highway patrol. (If my recollection of news media is correct)

**Jack Miller** · 17th August 2011, 14:06

Originally Posted by Parlane

To be fair, he has been taken off highway patrol. (If my recollection of news media is correct)

I guess that at least is fair. I missed that aspect in the media.

**Parlane** · 17th August 2011, 14:29

Originally Posted by Jack Miller

I guess that at least is fair. I missed that aspect in the media.

Article is here:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crim...police-coverup

Specific line:
"Since the crash Lenihan had been pulled off road policing and was based in Paeroa on front-line work."

My opinion on the matter of police being human beings too and that they make mistakes:

Yes, yes they make mistakes. It's not hard to make a mistake if you are making decisions in split seconds.

Is it wrong for me to expect police to instead take time to make a well formulated decision instead of a split second reaction?

What happened:
~150km/h ute going in the other direction
Reaction in this instance:
Turn around and give chase
In MY opinion what should have happened:
Officer takes time to look around, check what blind spots may be in force, thinks about "hey, if I turned here could I definitely make it without it being a tight squeeze, and would all oncoming traffic be able to see me make this maneuver from far away, are there yellow lines that say a normal driver shouldn't make this turn, if so, can I safely do the turn, I am just a normal human after all, I'm not super human"

Could I turn after this hill, do I know this road? I maybe could still catch him if I managed to turn a bit further down, bit safer for me and maybe others.

Double yellow lines says: Do not cross here, do not pass here, do not turn here.

If you want to treat the cop as a normal human, then a normal human has been told that it is not safe to do those things here.

**Jack Miller** · 17th August 2011, 14:47

Originally Posted by Parlane

Article is here:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crim...police-coverup
Specific line:
"Since the crash Lenihan had been pulled off road policing and was based in Paeroa on front-line work."

Thanks for the quote. He was taken off while under investigation for "dangerous driving causing death." Now that the charge has been lessened to "Careless Driving" his employers might feel inclined to reinstate him. Certainly the Police Association Director seems extremely sympathetic to Linehan

I note also "Mr Jackson said they would now discuss appealing the decision." I hope they find the resources and fortitude to do so.

Originally Posted by Parlane

If you want to treat the cop as a normal human, then a normal human has been told that it is not safe to do those things (3-point-turn) here.

Nicely put.

**Gearup** · 17th August 2011, 18:01

Originally Posted by PrincessBandit

A lot of good points there. Unfortunately the death of the rider outweighs all other considerations to most here. Yes, a rider died and that is a tragedy. Yes, I do feel the cop got off with a seemingly light punishment.
How many times though have there been cases for the general public where there seems to be no rhyme or reason how one case gets a "suitably harsh" penalty while another which is just as bad gets off with a slap on the wrist? I'm sure folk here could think of plenty of instances of incomprehensible sentences handed out to those who have been prosecuted. It's not just a case of one law for the police and another for us - it's rife throughout the justice system for "us", depending on our profession, public profile etc.

Yes, but what do you think would have happened penalty wise if the bike rider was a cop on police business and the car was being driven by a member of the public?

**scumdog** · 17th August 2011, 18:02

Originally Posted by Jack Miller

Ok, the charge appears to have been "careless use of a motor vehicle." The point remains the same though: there should be no one with such a conviction in the Highway Patrol.

Looks really bad for me then....

oh, and your rank is: "Poorly Informed Ranter"

**Katman** · 17th August 2011, 18:08

Originally Posted by Gearup

Yes, but what do you think would have happened penalty wise if the bike rider was a cop on police business and the car was being driven by a member of the public?

I imagine a police motorcyclist would exercise a greater degree of care when negotiating a blind crest.

**Parlane** · 17th August 2011, 18:10

Originally Posted by Gearup

Yes, but what do you think would have happened penalty wise if the bike rider was a cop on police business and the car was being driven by a member of the public?

Imagine what the penalty would have been if the bike was an officer responding to an event, and the car was just a normal guy who needed to turn around and decided it was possible there.

What would the punishment have been? Seriously? Should the guy in this scenario have turned here? Legally no. Same with the officer though.

Originally Posted by scumdog

Looks really bad for me then....

oh, and your rank is: "Poorly Informed Ranter"

What was that comment even about ?

**DMNTD:Me** · 17th August 2011, 18:11

Originally Posted by Katman

I imagine a police motorcyclist would exercise a greater degree of care when negotiating a blind crest.

I do agree without question...but I would EXPECT a professional rider/driver not to do a U-turn in such an inappropriate place when there was a safer option within 150m of the incident.

Edit...I have been to the site