Bikers collide with Police car in Buller Gorge (1 December)

[Ocean1]

I hope I never have to use it but there is a theory for this situation.

The correct procedure is to stand on the pegs just prior to impact. This can save you breaking both femurs on the handle bars and may hopefully lift your trajectory enough that you pass over the vehicle.

It don't make me an expert, but I've over-flown two cars, both having pulled out in front of me. One I hit immediately behind the front wheel and the other, (at more of an angle), immediately in front of the rear. Unfortunately I can't confirm that the above practice was what prevented me from intimate contact with the car, happened too quick, I just don't remember how I did it.
You're right though, the wee sojourn down the road cost me some scrapes and bruises but not the damage I'd have got otherwise.

Without pre-judging anything, and in this particular instance that isn't easy...
I can't remember the exact words but the British Police motorcycle riding manual warns against getting overwhelmed by the excitement of the occasion and letting judgement take a back seat.

Good advice, if your reactions are superhuman. In some situations you simply don't have time to think, barely enough to react. Those are the times professional athletes and soldiers train for, so the reaction is hard-wired, without needing the time to think. That's one reason I think learning riding skills on small off-road bikes is valuable, you crash, and you learn more about surviving crashes than you ever could on the road and remain alive.

[JimBob]

Much more dangerous to self and others to do a 3 point turn on a blind corner than to around it at a speed where you cannot stop in the visible distance.

I think they are both highly dangerous. One involves riding defensively and being aware, the other involves doing something (possibly)stupid. Unfortunately there was a coincidence in the space time continuum resulting in a crash.
Being unaware it wouldnt matter if it was a police car, campervan, deer, roadworks, another crash, the result would have been the same.
Doing something stupid speaks for itself.
Did the car turn in front of the bikes or was it already part way through its turn when the riders first sighted it? Makes a big difference.
It will all come out in the wash

[spudchucka]

Tax's thats going a bit low--- I thought you guys were self funding via the quota system

That's what a lot of half wits think, which is why you'd never make it despite them lowering the intake standards.

[terbang]

Fair comment, but surely arguing about it online does shit-all until you take it out the real world. All it does is give know-it-alls and people-with-axes-to-grind something to puff their chests about. 15 pages of thread and no-one has really convinced anyone of what happened...
Isn't it

Still don't agree with that either. I see some reasonably balanced debate on this thread (apart from one or two). Don't for one believe that we are the only ones reading here. The real world, what do you mean..? Ring them up, send them a letter or perhaps a personal visit? It doesn't get more real than motorcyclists dabating the un-neccesary demise of other motorcyclists. Remember, these guys came around a corner and were presented with a car, driven by someone who is supposed to be a professional, blocking the road. So its either, bikers slow to 10kph on all corners or dumb pricks driving cages should learn not to do youeys on corners. Take your pick... Also perhaps, excited cops should learn to put common sense and the safety of others (and themselves) first, before they get caught up in the chase. The Buller Gorge doesn't offer as many safe turning places as say the canterbury plains. The guy should have had a red flag in his head while in that area.
Yes maybe some people here have axes to grind, fair enough though remember, axe grinders can sometimes be right..!
There is a lot of anti motorcycle sentiment around, has been for a long time with the statement "temporary kiwi' being used for years. So its real easy to say "Oh well bloody bike must have been speeding" and thats it, sweep it under the mat. Lets face it, joe public doesn't really give a damn about bike riders, a senior cop states publicly that we are drunken old farts who are barely in control of our machines. So where do we go to air our concerns, meet other riders who share similar concerns and learn more about biking issues apart from the usual dishing up of bastardised media spin. Perhaps Kiwibiker! I am generally not anti cop and I understand the chase mentality asI also flew in law enforcement, where we hunted bad guys in the Timor and Arafura sea with an aeroplane. Often low level at night. These were real shit heads, people smugglers and drug importers and we saw some absolute misery out there beyond the horizon. The incentive was there to catch them for sure, but we had to put our own and others (includung the shit heads) safety ahead of the chase. Believe me, it was so hard to back off and let them get away with it. So whilst I sort of understand a cops dilemma, I also understand the discipline that the organization needs to do their job safely. I personally smell an unfortunate judgement error (the car driver) and an organization that would shirk their involvement and pass the buck if we let them. I hope I'm wrong.
We could all just sit back and say nothing and accept that the cops are right and have more common sense than us. Makes no difference to the victims of this crash anymore as its happened and they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. However we, bikers airin our concerns, could ensure that the next buch of riders going through the Buller Gorge at any speed greater than 10K won't be faced with a bloody great cop car parked across the road.

[terbang]

That's what a lot of half wits think, which is why you'd never make it despite them lowering the intake standards.

Present company and Scumdog exluded, I have also met some fairly dumb and brainwashed cops as well. Maybe this incident is highlighting a recruitment issue here..?

[MSTRS:Me]

Terbang - that is just full of paranoia and speculation. Shame on you.
How right you are, that's exactly what a lot of us are saying....it's not rocket science, eh?

[MSTRS:Me]

Maybe this incident is highlighting a recruitment issue here..?

Nope...apparently the cop in question is a seasoned veteran

[terbang]

Nope...apparently the cop in question is a seasoned veteran

Hmm, then perhaps its highlighing an issue with their refresher or recurrent training. They do do that don't they?

[spudchucka]

Present company and Scumdog exluded, I have also met some fairly dumb and brainwashed cops as well. Maybe this incident is highlighting a recruitment issue here..?

That was a coded message for Kooza, I mean cruza, he knows what I mean.

[puddytat]

To try & paint a picture of the accident site.....imagine a 'narrow' tree lined road with a bend in it...the road along there is narrow enough that you wonder how truckies cope meeting each other in places
At the point of impact it is narrower than most residential streets.From the outside lane lines you have maybe 200mmm till your in a ditch/bank,tree situation. The other side is slightly better as have mabe 5oomm of moss & leaf litter, you'd not hit a bank, but you would fly thru the trees on your way over a cliff to drop 20 odd metres if your lucky into the Buller river....
A 'vehicle ' can ONLY do a minimum 2 point turn here(mini sized). Id be doing well to do a Ue there on my bike (I wouldnt as its a blind corner) in two moves . A car has no room cause of the cliff on one side ,the ditch on the other,youd get stuck if you wernt careful.
The Policeman was lucky that it was the bikes that hit him,otherwise he'd be lying in hospital now too.
'Murph' in his V8 race car travelling at a normal speed for this stretch of road even with the bestest of brakes ,rubber & 2 extra wheels would NOT IMO have been able to stop in the distance from 1st reaction to impact. The riders would have also had only time to think,no option to swerve as there is nowhere to go...cause there's a the HP car across 90% of available space.
I'll give the investigating authorities the benefit of the doubt to come up with the same conclusion...as to a prosecution, well thats another story

[Coldrider]

The Dog handler did not have his siren on - there is no requirement in law to have your siren going only your lights - and he would of done this due to the fact that he was going to a burglars on. When the crash occured neither the dog handler, supervisor or district commander wanted anyone charged. It instead went to an ex MOT Inspector who then stated that he wanted the other driver charged who did the U turn.


Then after he got off (which was about three months ago i think?) this ex MOT Inspector - now retired from the Police - came to Court and stated that the Police should never have charged him.

The facts of whether the siren is off or on is not my arguement, or any of the rest of this incident. Are you a cop?
My arguement is that this case is fresh in the minds of the police, and it's decision/outcome sets presedents for future like for like incidences.
Our common law is derived by decisions of judges, based on statutes, that set a presedent over time, and determine how a particular law is to be interpreted and applied, and that presedent is hard to change (binding).
That is why judges and the courts are independant of police and government.

[Coldrider]

...crash yet. That case appears quite different as it was two cars travelling in the same direction with one doing a U turn on a four laned road.

The difference is where lawyers make their money, and why it will take awhile to investigate (that not too many are prepared to wait for). As previously stated, I have more interest in the outcome, rather than if anyone is charged.
That outcome directly affects my perceived personal safety on ther roads.

[Skyryder]

Because of the curve and the other factors mentioned the first bike would not be able to see the stationary vehicle until they had clear view past these obstacles. The two second rule has no bearing to this bike.

The second bike, following at a safe distance no doubt, can't see the stationary vehicle at the same moment as bike one, because of the curvature etc. However, he would have likely seen his mates brake lights come on or see the bike swerve or perhaps he even noticed the sudden eruption of brown lumps from the rear of the bike.

So, unless he was asleep or riding two abreast he should have had more warning, at least two seconds if he is good boy, than his mate did before seeing the stationary vehicle.

It is obvious that the two second rule would have help the second rider to some degree.

So what you are saying is that the first bike may not be at fault but the second could be? Interesting.........................novel but still interesting.
But the thing that interests me is how the cop 'knew' the biker was speeding. Now if you can tell me that I for one would be very interested..........just how do you determine the speed of an oncoming vehicle without electronics??

Skyryder

[spudchucka]

So what you are saying is that the first bike may not be at fault but the second could be? Interesting.........................novel but still interesting.
But the thing that interests me is how the cop 'knew' the biker was speeding. Now if you can tell me that I for one would be very interested..........just how do you determine the speed of an oncoming vehicle without electronics??

Skyryder

No Mr Twister that's not what I said at all.

If you go back to post 196 and read it again you'll see that I said it was interesting that they both collided with the stationary vehicle and pondered as to whether they were riding two abreast.

I then pointed out that IF they were riding single file the second rider SHOULD have had a better chance of avoiding the collision as he MAY have had the benefit of seeing his mates reactions prior to the stationary vehicle coming into his field of view. You will no doubt recall the mini discussion on the Peter Brock rule and how it applies to the two bike, blind corner, stationary vehicle situation.

Without being there I couldn't possibly say how the cop arrived at the decision that they were speeding. BUT, since this thread is all about speculation, why not suggest that he saw the rider come around the corner, knee down then saw the bike begin skidding wildly out of control, leaving 100 metres of skid marks on the road prior to pulling a stoppie for a further 30 metres before actually impacting with the floundering bumble-bee car. Being a veteran with some experience and in all likely-hood an ex MOT officer he would have been able to conclude from what he saw that the bike was probably speeding.

[Coldrider]

What Spud is saying is quite true, I have been amazed how some of the traffic cops can accuratley pick the speed a car is going from looking at it and then flick their radar on and see how close they are too it. Certainly i don't doubt that an experienced traffic cop can tell if a car is speeding from just visually seeing it.

Yes, I know, visually red cars go much faster at any given speed.
I was in a line of traffic entering Ashurst from the gorge, going to Massey, at the 70 kph sign everyone slowed to 70, about five cars in file, I was in the middle in my supercharged hot red commodore, HP by the gas station points his laser gun at me, five cars equally distanced in file at the same speed, I am sure red cars go faster, wasted his time.