SCU on TV1 - bike vs car fatal

[marmel]

Actually I did watch the video, I watched the whole thing.
SCU, in this country is a joke.
They are there to determine that someone is at fault, this way revenue can be extracted from the assessed in the wrong party and no one leaves unscathed.
If you look but don't see me (this happens all the time, never mind the distance argument) You! are still damned well in the wrong.
Once upon a time, where an accident that caused death was being attended, the attending officers job was to asses who did what, record contact details, at a later date those people were interviewed, get the fucking road reopened with as little fuss as possible. Don't forget, there were nosey car drivers to attend to as well, fire helped keep traffic going, Ambo's who have always done sterling work, did all they could too.
You got any idea what it costs the country to have a main arterial road closed for any length of time?
bet you don't!
Today, a clear cut, pulled out in front of oncoming vehicle, means road closed all day while SCU attends, takes pics, maps scene, determines who did what, then and this is non negotiable, someone is charged, why?:Revenue, that's why, it's not about deducing how it happened, taking the lesson and making sure it doesn't happen again.
The same scenario is happening everyday here in NZ.
Name me one piece of road that is similar or close to the same as another where lessons learn't at a fatal accident scene have been applied.
It doesn't happen, it is all about the big stick and collecting as much as possible from our citizens, not doing all that can be done to protect them.
My view on dumb assed bike jockeys is well known by many I ride with. As bike riders it behooves us to make sure wer'e OK, first and foremost.Being right and DEAD is no real option now is it.

This is a ridiculous way of thinking.

For a start, unless there is some sought of external influence such as a big pothole or mechanical failure there is always someone at fault regardless of what you might think.

Do you really think the cops pay what would amount to millions of dollars in salary plus costs of vehicles and equipment just to try and get revenue back from motorists that have crashes serious enough to warrant SCU attending???

Have you been to court lately and seen the fines that get handed out, sweet fuck all. In 99% of the cases community work or home detention is the standard sentence for careless driving causing death. Which by the way costs millions of dollars more to put in place and monitor.

So no the SCU aren't there to gather revenue. They are there to establish why a crash happened and the liability of those involved, if any.

Anyone with a bit of common sense would easily see the SCU would certainly not be paying their own way, quite the opposite.

[caseye]

This is a ridiculous way of thinking.

For a start, unless there is some sought of external influence such as a big pothole or mechanical failure there is always someone at fault regardless of what you might think.

Do you really think the cops pay what would amount to millions of dollars in salary plus costs of vehicles and equipment just to try and get revenue back from motorists that have crashes serious enough to warrant SCU attending???

Have you been to court lately and seen the fines that get handed out, sweet fuck all. In 99% of the cases community work or home detention is the standard sentence for careless driving causing death. Which by the way costs millions of dollars more to put in place and monitor.

So no the SCU aren't there to gather revenue. They are there to establish why a crash happened and the liability of those involved, if any.

Anyone with a bit of common sense would easily see the SCU would certainly not be paying their own way, quite the opposite.

You are right about the fact that they don't and never will pay their on way.
You are wrong about why they are there. It is to establish who was in the wrong, yes.Then their recommendation as to who is and isn't prosecuted is acted upon with no regard for situation or circumstance, it is the worst sort of time wasting and yes, revenue gathering.
Of course it's not going to pay it's way, but it is going to inconvenience many other road users for many hours at a time, any idea what it costs to close a main arterial road for a few hours?
The real cost of goods arriving late, out of time frozens, organs that can't be transplanted, fresh produce that arrives too late to go to market, to name a few.
Tell me, a truck drops diesel for many K's without the driver knowing, a driver/rider comes around a corner, hits a patch and careers into oncoming traffic, who's at fault?
Is it possible to find the truck or it's driver?
Is this not a classic case of an accident for those involved?
Court, are you kidding me? Mix with NZ's most wanted, lowest of the low, none of whom can pay a fine anyhow, not for a long time I haven't and the longer that time gets the better I feel.

[marmel]

You are right about the fact that they don't and never will pay their on way.
You are wrong about why they are there. It is to establish who was in the wrong, yes.Then their recommendation as to who is and isn't prosecuted is acted upon with no regard for situation or circumstance, it is the worst sort of time wasting and yes, revenue gathering.
Of course it's not going to pay it's way, but it is going to inconvenience many other road users for many hours at a time, any idea what it costs to close a main arterial road for a few hours?
The real cost of goods arriving late, out of time frozens, organs that can't be transplanted, fresh produce that arrives too late to go to market, to name a few.
Tell me, a truck drops diesel for many K's without the driver knowing, a driver/rider comes around a corner, hits a patch and careers into oncoming traffic, who's at fault?
Is it possible to find the truck or it's driver?
Is this not a classic case of an accident for those involved?
Court, are you kidding me? Mix with NZ's most wanted, lowest of the low, none of whom can pay a fine anyhow, not for a long time I haven't and the longer that time gets the better I feel.

For a start SCU never recommend who is/isn't to be charged. There only role is to establish the circumstances surrounding the crash, why it happened, who caused it etc. Normally the O/C of the crash file would decide on a charge.

The SCU only attend crashes were very serious injury or death has occurred, hardly a situation where they are just out ot waste someones time.

Once again I repeat, serious crashes in NZ cost MILLIONS and MILLIONS, no one makes any money out of serious crashes, the revenue gathering statement couldn't be further from the truth. Even a basic prosecution for careless causing death would cost $10K plus taking into account the time of all the staff involved, including court staff, the judge etc. HOW is this revenue gathering again, spend tens of thousands of dollars to get $500 back????

If you are really worried about a road being closed and "inconveniencing" motorists spare a thought for the poor bugger whose loved one has just been killed. Do you think that perhaps they deserve a little more of your consideration to make sure they have all the facts around what happened and can be satisfied that a proper job has been done by the SCU as opposed to a quick 30 minute spray some paint down and make up the rest type of job?

If you want to enlighten yourself get along to an inquest in your local area, they are open to the public, it might make you appreciate that just about everything you are saying is clearly incorrect and based on anything but fact.

[FJRider]

For a start, unless there is some sought of external influence such as a big pothole or mechanical failure there is always someone at fault regardless of what you might think.

Bullshit. Bad timiming accounts for a high percentage of accidents. Sadly ... a lack of WOF seems to attract blame in some cases. Regardless of actual FAULT.

Do you really think the cops pay what would amount to millions of dollars in salary plus costs of vehicles and equipment just to try and get revenue back from motorists that have crashes serious enough to warrant SCU attending???

Return of revenue is NOT an SCU priority. Finding out what was the cause and (maybe) preventing it happening again ... IS .. !!!

Have you been to court lately and seen the fines that get handed out, sweet fuck all. In 99% of the cases community work or home detention is the standard sentence for careless driving causing death. Which by the way costs millions of dollars more to put in place and monitor.

Not an SCU issue/priority ...

So no the SCU aren't there to gather revenue. They are there to establish why a crash happened and the liability of those involved, if any.

WHY it happened is more their interest than WHOM was at fault.

Anyone with a bit of common sense would easily see the SCU would certainly not be paying their own way, quite the opposite.

How many lives saved by changes to road layout (with SCU reccommendation) after an "Accident" ... would amount to "Paying their own way" ... in YOUR considered opinion .. ???

[marmel]

Bad timing doesn't cause crashes, never has, never will. If both parties are following the road rules there has to be someone at fault, please explain to me how someone can crash just from bad timing. This accident wasn't caused by bad timing, it was cuased for the most part by the speed of the bike. Do you have some examples of where bad timing has caused a crash?

[madbikeboy]

If there is ever a decision of fault between a motorcyclist and a car driver, the car driver gets the benefit of the doubt. Bikers = less important than car people.

[marmel]

If there is ever a decision of fault between a motorcyclist and a car driver, the car driver gets the benefit of the doubt. Bikers = less important than car people.

Fairly emotive statement there, facts are facts at the end of the day. There is no magic "motorbike" equations, just normal physics which most of us learned in school.

[FJRider]

If there is ever a decision of fault between a motorcyclist and a car driver, the car driver gets the benefit of the doubt. Bikers = less important than car people.

Is fault relevant if ONE of those involved is dead ... ??

If fault is derived from deductions or guesswork ... will they still press charges against those (those they believe are) at fault ... even if they are dead .. ??

[marmel]

Is fault relevant if ONE of those involved is dead ... ??

If fault is derived from deductions or guesswork ... will they still press charges against those (those they believe are) at fault ... even if they are dead .. ??

I think fault is always relevant, even if the deceased is at fault. Most families want to know the truth regardless.

[FJRider]

Bad timing doesn't cause crashes, never has, never will. If both parties are following the road rules there has to be someone at fault, please explain to me how someone can crash just from bad timing. This accident wasn't caused by bad timing, it was cuased for the most part by the speed of the bike. Do you have some examples of where bad timing has caused a crash?

Bad timing ... to avoid accidents ... do you increase or lower your speed ... ???

Would arriving at at accident scene 20 seconds later/earlier than you did ... make any difference to the result ... if you were involved .. ??

[FJRider]

I think fault is always relevant, even if the deceased is at fault. Most families want to know the truth regardless.

In my opinion ... The SCU priority is CAUSE. NOT fault.

Only the media (and KB) are interested in fault.

[marmel]

Bad timing ... to avoid accidents ... do you increase or lower your speed ... ???

Would arriving at at accident scene 20 seconds later/earlier than you did ... make any difference to the result ... if you were involved .. ??

This is nothing to do with timing at all.

Time has absolutely no bearing on an accident if both parties are following the road rules does it?

Someone still needs to do something wrong to cause the crash, pull out in front of someone, going too fast, driunk etc etc.

The actions of the driver have caused the crash, not the time.

Like I said earlier if there is no external influence on an accident including mechanical failure, enviromental conditions, sudden acts of god, there is ALWAYS someone at fault, these things don't just happen randomly, hence why police tend to call them crashes rather than accidents.

[marmel]

In my opinion ... The SCU priority is CAUSE. NOT fault.

Only the media (and KB) are interested in fault.

Really?? Do you think a family of the deceased may want to know who was at fault? Of course they do, and like I said often regardless of whose fault it was, their loved one or someone else.

[FJRider]

This is nothing to do with timing at all.

Time has absolutely no bearing on an accident if both parties are following the road rules does it?

Someone still needs to do something wrong to cause the crash, pull out in front of someone, going too fast, driunk etc etc.

The actions of the driver have caused the crash, not the time.

Like I said earlier if there is no external influence on an accident including mechanical failure, enviromental conditions, sudden acts of god, there is ALWAYS someone at fault, these things don't just happen randomly, hence why police tend to call them crashes rather than accidents.

Timing .. is NOT the time of day. Merely ... wrong place at the wrong time ... Are you stupid .. ??

"Following the road rules" is NO guarantee of avoiding an accident. Nor always an absense of fault. Wrong (legal) decisions of action CAN be ..

[marmel]

Timing .. is NOT the time of day. Merely ... wrong place at the wrong time ... Are you stupid .. ??

"Following the road rules" is NO gurantee of avoiding an accident. Nor always an absense of fault. Wrong (legal) decisions of action CAN be ..

You still fail to acknowledge that one of the parties HAS TO BE AT FAULT. I can't say it any simpler than that for you. Following the road rules is a gaurantee of avoiding an accident as long as both parties are following the rules. If one party is not and an accident occurs, guess what THEY ARE AT FAULT.

You can wrap it up any way you like but you haven't made one statement based on fact which shows accidents are caused by bad timing.

Wrong place at the wrong time? Really? This is what you base your argument on.

Sorry your honor, I did pull out in front of that bike and yes he was killed but at the end of the day HE WAS IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME.

Oh well now you put it that way you are free to go, well argued sir.