Hang em both - BMW Luxury Touring Community
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 49 Old Feb 3rd, 2008, 11:07 pm Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lake Stevens, WA, USA
Posts: 2,651
Hang em both

The cop and the rider need serious jail time here.
http://www.wfaa.com/video/wfaagenera...ml?nvid=199548

Brian Ley
WA State of mindless sheep
USA where everything is illegal
2007 K1200GT
2010 650GS
2000 k1200LT Sold but not forgotten
BMWOA 119892
sanjaun2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 12:45 am
Senior Member
 
Bobnoxous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 783
Well, the cop did bring the chase to an end, and if we accept that the punishment for trying to elude an officer is a death sentence without a trial, justice was done.

Then again, cops use a pit maneuver to try and stop cars. Is there any acceptable way to try and stop a motorcycle? How much liability lies with the cyclist, who chose to try and elude, and how much with the cop, who apparently had no problem using deadly force to end the chase.

When a government takes over a people’s economic life it becomes absolute, and when it has become absolute it destroys the arts, the minds, the liberties and the meaning of the people it governs.
- Maxwell Anderson

Bob
2007 K1200GT
Bobnoxous is offline  
post #3 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 9:09 am
Super Moderator
 
DavidTaylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Posts: 7,565
That's no way for an officer to use his vehicle to stop a chase with a motorcycle. And the person who got the worst end of it (she's in rehab learning to talk again after severe head trauma) was the bike's passenger who had no control over the situation. Even the pursuing officer asked him what he was thinking. He should be fired, minimally. With that video you know a massive civil suit will be coming.

David Taylor
San Jose, CA
2010 R1200RT Polar Metallic
AMA, BMWMOA
Booze Brother #4

The shortest distance between two points is for people who don't ride!



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
DavidTaylor is offline  
 
post #4 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 9:09 am
Senior Member
 
DanDiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Posts: 4,833
Nothing Wrong?

Quoted from the newspaper article:

"Officer William Allen has been identified as the officer who swerved into the motorcycle. He was suspended for 60 days after the crash for violating department policy. Another officer at the scene, who has not been identified, was suspended for 15 days by Chief Benjamin."

I don't understand why the officers were suspended for 15 and 60 days if they did nothing wrong.

For running a red light, why not, if the license plate can be read, just stop the chase and mail a ticket to the offender? Seems that the chase just compounds the problem. Innocent people get hurt. If the officer stops the chase, for a minor traffic violation, the reckless driving is diminished. Maybe I'm just being naive!

Dano
Tampa, Fl.

12 K1600 GTL
02 K1200 LT (gone but not forgotten)
DanDiver is offline  
post #5 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 10:32 am
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
I'm surprised that we don't just let people shoot people and then run away then. What's the criteria for enforcing the law? A monetary amount? A personal connection to the criminal(s)? It's pretty simple really, you break the law, you pay the price. If the law you broke was running a red light, and then you pulled over.. you pay the price = ticket. You want to engage an officer in pursuit, you pay the price. Although in this case, that officer is REALLY lucky that bike and passengers didn't come flying through his windshield and kill him instantly. I do feel sorry for the girl on the back, but the only person who is responsible for her injuries is the asshat who ran, NOT the officers who made him stop before he killed or injured some other innocent person (s). The right thing to do is to pull that guys license for the rest of his life and put him in jail for a couple decades for endangering the public. Overwhelming lethal force should be used immediately to stop any vehicle that engages in pursuit.

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #6 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 11:02 am
Senior Member
 
BMWphreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Putnam, CT, USA
Posts: 1,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMC1
I'm surprised that we don't just let people shoot people and then run away then. What's the criteria for enforcing the law? A monetary amount? A personal connection to the criminal(s)? It's pretty simple really, you break the law, you pay the price. If the law you broke was running a red light, and then you pulled over.. you pay the price = ticket. You want to engage an officer in pursuit, you pay the price. Although in this case, that officer is REALLY lucky that bike and passengers didn't come flying through his windshield and kill him instantly. I do feel sorry for the girl on the back, but the only person who is responsible for her injuries is the asshat who ran, NOT the officers who made him stop before he killed or injured some other innocent person (s). The right thing to do is to pull that guys license for the rest of his life and put him in jail for a couple decades for endangering the public. Overwhelming lethal force should be used immediately to stop any vehicle that engages in pursuit.
Kevin, I think your button has been pushed again...

'07 - R1200RT Slippery Silver

MOA #107139
RA #28511

Past rides:
'03 R1150RT - MAXed out
'03 K1200LTC - Gone to the Darko side
'00 Kawasaki Concours - Buzz
'71 Honda SL350 - The original dual-sport
'72 Kawasaki 250 triple - The smoking gun
'67 Montgomery Wards 125 - Thrashed to death
BMWphreak is offline  
post #7 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 11:20 am
Senior Member
 
DanDiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Posts: 4,833
OVERWHELMING FORSE for running a red light!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BMWphreak
Kevin, I think your button has been pushed again...
Come on....... lighten up a little. What if a member of your family was killed during a pursuit? Would you be so caviler? I don't think so. Sometime a little discretion allows a situation to cool off and be handled a little more civilized... People get hurt by those who run red lights occasionally but not time. Use some discretion, maybe....?

Dano
Tampa, Fl.

12 K1600 GTL
02 K1200 LT (gone but not forgotten)
DanDiver is offline  
post #8 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 11:59 am
Senior Member
 
OKUIII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Irvine, California,
Posts: 565
Unhappy

Looks to me like the cops was in the wrong lane, going the wrong direction and then aimed the car directly at the bike. What gives him that right to cause that kind of injury for a normal red light voilation..? Even if they do not get him, they probally had the plate number and coculd go directly to that persons home and arrest or cite him.

Here comes Mark Gergragos.

O. K. Upchurch III
Irvine, California

2016 R1200gs
2000 K1200LT (Best Bike #1)
1997 R1100RT (Best Bike #2)
1995 K1100LT
1990 K75RT
OKUIII is offline  
post #9 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 12:07 pm
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveDragon
Pasco County SD has a No Chase Policy for Motorcycles to prevent disasters like this.
I like that, if I want to rob the bank, I'll be sure to use my motorcycle.
Big_E is offline  
post #10 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 12:13 pm
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Here we go......again

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #11 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 1:18 pm
IBR# 366
 
meese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: West Linn, OR
Posts: 16,417
Garage
You're obviously unfamiliar with the concept of "reasonable force".

I say that we go whole hog here. Many riders carry, why don't we just start enforcing the laws ourselves? Someone cut you off? - just run them into the barrier. Idiot on cell phone doing 10 under in the fast lane? - go ahead and bump them out of the way. Cops too slow to respond to someone running red lights? - just shoot them yourself. After all, we don't need these kind of morons on the road, and we're actually making it safer for the rest of the normal drivers.

Yeah, that'll work.

For the record, the bike rider who ran is responsible for his actions and for endangering his passenger. But the cop who rammed him is directly responsible for the injuries caused and needs to be held directly accountable.

Ken
Pacific NorthWet
'13 Dark Graphite Metallic K16GTLD, 24K miles
'09 Magnesium Beige Metallic K13GT, 63K miles
'03 Anthracite Metallic K12LTC, 66K miles
'02 Mauve Metallic K12LTC, 106K miles and sold
BMWLT#143, IBA# 366, MOA# 111996, SCMA# 24032


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Some people see the gas tank as half empty. Some see it as half full. All I care is that I know where the next tankful is coming from...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
meese is offline  
post #12 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 1:43 pm
Senior Member
 
DanDiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Tampa, FL, USA
Posts: 4,833
Are you serious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_E
I like that, if I want to rob the bank, I'll be sure to use my motorcycle.
Can't see the difference between robbing a bank and running a red light? Guess it's best ( I hope) that you are not a law enforcement officer!

Dano
Tampa, Fl.

12 K1600 GTL
02 K1200 LT (gone but not forgotten)
DanDiver is offline  
post #13 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 2:15 pm
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 713
My God!!!!

Meese,, I agree with you.........Pete
petepeterson is offline  
post #14 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 2:54 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMWphreak
Kevin, I think your button has been pushed again...
LOL! It DOES just kind of stick right up out there waiting to be pushed!

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #15 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 2:55 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
Here we go......again
LOL! Who's we???

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #16 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 2:59 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by meese
You're obviously unfamiliar with the concept of "reasonable force".

I say that we go whole hog here. Many riders carry, why don't we just start enforcing the laws ourselves? Someone cut you off? - just run them into the barrier. Idiot on cell phone doing 10 under in the fast lane? - go ahead and bump them out of the way. Cops too slow to respond to someone running red lights? - just shoot them yourself. After all, we don't need these kind of morons on the road, and we're actually making it safer for the rest of the normal drivers.

Yeah, that'll work.

For the record, the bike rider who ran is responsible for his actions and for endangering his passenger. But the cop who rammed him is directly responsible for the injuries caused and needs to be held directly accountable.
Ahhhh.... You're totally hopeless.

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #17 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 3:02 pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Newark, CA, USA
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMC1
LOL! It DOES just kind of stick right up out there waiting to be pushed!
EXACTLY!

Well put.
CalLT is offline  
post #18 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 3:10 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by dandiver
Come on....... lighten up a little. What if a member of your family was killed during a pursuit? Would you be so caviler? I don't think so. Sometime a little discretion allows a situation to cool off and be handled a little more civilized... People get hurt by those who run red lights occasionally but not time. Use some discretion, maybe....?
I really don't see what's cavalier about my opinion on this. It's not the red-light violation that I have the problem with. It's the engaging in pursuit while piloting a missle through traffic part that I have a problem with.

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #19 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 3:13 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by dandiver
Can't see the difference between robbing a bank and running a red light? Guess it's best ( I hope) that you are not a law enforcement officer!
This goes directly back to my original post. What's the criteria we should use? Monetary? So catching someone who just stole some money, is more important than stopping someone who is blazing through traffic on a missle? I disagree.

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #20 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 3:15 pm
Super Moderator
 
DavidTaylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Posts: 7,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMC1
I'm surprised that we don't just let people shoot people and then run away then. What's the criteria for enforcing the law? A monetary amount? A personal connection to the criminal(s)? It's pretty simple really, you break the law, you pay the price. If the law you broke was running a red light, and then you pulled over.. you pay the price = ticket. You want to engage an officer in pursuit, you pay the price. Although in this case, that officer is REALLY lucky that bike and passengers didn't come flying through his windshield and kill him instantly. I do feel sorry for the girl on the back, but the only person who is responsible for her injuries is the asshat who ran, NOT the officers who made him stop before he killed or injured some other innocent person (s). The right thing to do is to pull that guys license for the rest of his life and put him in jail for a couple decades for endangering the public. Overwhelming lethal force should be used immediately to stop any vehicle that engages in pursuit.
You're way off here, buddy. Putting a 4500 lb. police car intentionally in the path of a 450 lb motorcycle is not a reasonable use of force. Yes, evading the police is wrong and stupid. But I'm fairly certain that the use of lethal force isn't approved for that infraction alone. Even couple that with running a red light and you havne't compounded this into a lethal force situation. The goal is to difuse and end the situation, not compound it and kill people. If they had established a roadblock and were stopped waiting for him to approach and he hit the car, that's one thing, But what this guy did was wrong.

David Taylor
San Jose, CA
2010 R1200RT Polar Metallic
AMA, BMWMOA
Booze Brother #4

The shortest distance between two points is for people who don't ride!



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
DavidTaylor is offline  
post #21 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 3:46 pm
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Let me change this up just a little and see if it makes any difference by going hypothetical. Forget the red light violation for just a second and lets just say that the kid on the bike is a known felon running from the police and the police use the same action as in this video, would that be a little more reasonable to most of you rather than a red light violation?

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #22 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 3:51 pm
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,905
I wonder if that copper would have done the same thing if the assailant was driving a school bus? I didn't think so...

There's more than one moron in that video.
messenger13 is offline  
post #23 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:05 pm
IBR# 366
 
meese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: West Linn, OR
Posts: 16,417
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
Let me change this up just a little and see if it makes any difference by going hypothetical. Forget the red light violation for just a second and lets just say that the kid on the bike is a known felon running from the police and the police use the same action as in this video, would that be a little more reasonable to most of you rather than a red light violation?
And what if he was only a suspected felon? Does that still allow the use of lethal force? How do you describe known? "I saw him rob a bank or shoot someone so therefore he's automatically guilty" or "he was legally convicted in a court of law by a jury of his peers and has escaped"?

While its seems like criminals sometimes have more rights than officers, it's more that the officers are bound to uphold the laws while following those same laws themselves. Criminals by definition aren't bound by the same restrictions. Obviously there are special circumstances, as in a LEO going over the posted speed limit while in pursuit, but even these cases have rules and limits placed on the officer. That's what keeps the cops and the criminals separate.

As usual there's too little info here to make any sort of accurate judgement, and as usual that won't stop everyone from doing so.

But the cop was way out of line based on the scanty information already given.

Ken
Pacific NorthWet
'13 Dark Graphite Metallic K16GTLD, 24K miles
'09 Magnesium Beige Metallic K13GT, 63K miles
'03 Anthracite Metallic K12LTC, 66K miles
'02 Mauve Metallic K12LTC, 106K miles and sold
BMWLT#143, IBA# 366, MOA# 111996, SCMA# 24032


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Some people see the gas tank as half empty. Some see it as half full. All I care is that I know where the next tankful is coming from...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
meese is offline  
post #24 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:15 pm
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 57
Donuts?

I would guess..... that since we do not know the intentions of the officer ie. To set up a road block or just run them down, we might all be guessing at this point. I just hope someone brings donuts again. It has been awhile since the last heated thread about the police and I have kinda missed it.
Patdcop is offline  
post #25 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:17 pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Newark, CA, USA
Posts: 302
I can't even believe this constitutes a "debate." Holy crap ... I know cops have tough jobs but that's just ridiculous. Unless the guy has a gun in his hand and he is shooting at people, there is no excuse for that.
CalLT is offline  
post #26 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:23 pm
Senior Member
 
Bobnoxous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patdcop
I would guess..... that since we do not know the intentions of the officer ie. To set up a road block or just run them down, we might all be guessing at this point. I just hope someone brings donuts again. It has been awhile since the last heated thread about the police and I have kinda missed it.
Everytime a debate comes up about how an LEO should've acted, LEOs bring up the doughnut comment. Well, I don't have any doughnuts. But, I do have some cookies. I'm going to go get one.

When a government takes over a people’s economic life it becomes absolute, and when it has become absolute it destroys the arts, the minds, the liberties and the meaning of the people it governs.
- Maxwell Anderson

Bob
2007 K1200GT
Bobnoxous is offline  
post #27 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:34 pm
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Let me explain my earlier hypothetical question. In Texas (and this is important) it is a felony to elude a pursuing police vehicle, so that makes you a known felon immediately no matter the reason for the initial attempted traffic stop, so by state law (notice I said STATE LAW and this is Texas) the officer was justified in his actions 100%. Now, his department, I'm sure, has standard operating procedures for pursuits in place, which he may or may not have violated. Civilly the department and the officer are not going to have any problems, because the Supreme Court recently ruled that by eluding a pursuing police vehicle YOU assume all responsibility, so police can not be sued for injuries YOU sustain or anyone injured as a result of YOUR actions or the actions of the police attempting to stop YOU. So, unless his department has a pursuit policy that the officer violated than legally he is totally in the clear. Now, would I have done the same thing in his situation...jury is still out on that one until I know more of the details, but there would have to be a lot more details than what I have heard and seen up till now. With that said, the officers on the scene are making judgement calls by the split second and don't have the luxury to sit back and Monday Morning Quarterback it. You can say it is wrong morally, and you can come up with lots of reasons for not doing it, but the officer was enforcing the law and by state and federal law completly within his rights, so don't blame the officer if you don't like the laws he is enforcing. Blame the politicians that make the laws and the lawyers that make them work however fits their needs. We certainly don't need another cop bashing thread here again.

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #28 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:43 pm
Senior Member
 
zippy_gg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennesaw, GA, USA
Posts: 8,115
Depends... Would he be a felon who embezzled money from a bank or would he be a felon who murdered people in the course of a botched robbery? Would that make a difference?

I am not convinced a LEO know who he/she is dealing with at the time a pursuit starts. I am sure officers use their best judgement with the information they have.
Still the officer not only hurt the rider of the bike, but also the passenger, and I have a problem with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
Let me change this up just a little and see if it makes any difference by going hypothetical. Forget the red light violation for just a second and lets just say that the kid on the bike is a known felon running from the police and the police use the same action as in this video, would that be a little more reasonable to most of you rather than a red light violation?

Gilles & Kathy
BMWMOA# 154719
IBA# 71594
2011 Ostra Gray RT
06 Mercedes-Benz E350 Estate (parts and people hauler)
2012 BMW X3 (parts and people hauler)
86 Porsche 911 Cabriolet (my "new" baby)



For her I climbed the highest mountain!
For her I swam across the deepest ocean!
For her I walked through the largest desert!
And then she left me... She said I was never home!!!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
zippy_gg is offline  
post #29 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:49 pm
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 57
Actually Bob, it just me that brings up the donut thing. It is a parody and a paradox. Part of the stereotypical image about cops being to busy to do anything but eat donuts. As a retired Police Chief that has written departmental policies on everything from radar operation, pursuits, and yes, use of force continuums. I think we (me included) jump the gun on the monday night quarterback thing. I have sat on more incident review boards than I care to remember. If you look at my past post on these subjects, I rarely advocate for ether side of the issue. Nor do I slam a position posted by any ether of this site. I fully believe the more the issues are discussed the more everyone (me included) begin to understand the legal, social, and psychological impact these issues have on each of us.
Patdcop is offline  
post #30 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 4:51 pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Newark, CA, USA
Posts: 302
I have lots of friends who are cops, some of whom I ride with. I am normally among the first to jump to their defense, because they really do put up with lots of crap, and don't get the respect they deserve.

But what that cop did is pure [email protected]#%. I don't particularly care if he's within Texas law. Part of being a good cop is understanding the difference between right and wrong. And what he did was plainly wrong. He pulled into that one-way street to ram that guy, and that's precisely what he did.

It was pretty miraculous he didn't kill them both.
CalLT is offline  
post #31 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 5:50 pm
Senior Member
 
BMWphreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Putnam, CT, USA
Posts: 1,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by dandiver
Come on....... lighten up a little. What if a member of your family was killed during a pursuit? Would you be so caviler? I don't think so. Sometime a little discretion allows a situation to cool off and be handled a little more civilized... People get hurt by those who run red lights occasionally but not time. Use some discretion, maybe....?

Oh, I agree with you Dan. I was just making an observation of KMC's behavior and since I know him, I was making a joke about him, not the situation being discussed. There certainly were other, much better options, then a high speed pursuit.

'07 - R1200RT Slippery Silver

MOA #107139
RA #28511

Past rides:
'03 R1150RT - MAXed out
'03 K1200LTC - Gone to the Darko side
'00 Kawasaki Concours - Buzz
'71 Honda SL350 - The original dual-sport
'72 Kawasaki 250 triple - The smoking gun
'67 Montgomery Wards 125 - Thrashed to death
BMWphreak is offline  
post #32 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
because the Supreme Court recently ruled that by eluding a pursuing police vehicle YOU assume all responsibility, so police can not be sued for injuries YOU sustain or anyone injured as a result of YOUR actions or the actions of the police attempting to stop YOU.
This is precisely the core of the issue and I agree with your post.

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #33 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 7:34 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by zippy_gg
Still the officer not only hurt the rider of the bike, but also the passenger, and I have a problem with that.
No. The Asshat who engaged in pursuit hurt himself, his passenger and potentially the Officer, innocent bystanders, your wife/domestic partner coming home from work, your child crossing the street on his/her way home from school, a postal worker delivering mail, etc. etc. etc.
It is NOT the Officer's fault for the damage caused by the Criminal's actions. I applaud that Officer and his dept. for their actions in taking a menace off the street before he was able to inflict even more damage.

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #34 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 7:36 pm
Senior Member
 
KMC1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SLC, UT, United States Of America
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMWphreak
I was just making an observation of KMC's behavior and since I know him, I was making a joke about him,
Wait. You were JOKING? I thought you were serious! /sarc

R1200GSA Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It's off to Alaska I go!
(Down to ONE BIKE - ARGH!)
KMC1 is offline  
post #35 of 49 Old Feb 4th, 2008, 8:30 pm
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalLT
I have lots of friends who are cops, some of whom I ride with. I am normally among the first to jump to their defense, because they really do put up with lots of crap, and don't get the respect they deserve.

But what that cop did is pure [email protected]#%. I don't particularly care if he's within Texas law. Part of being a good cop is understanding the difference between right and wrong. And what he did was plainly wrong. He pulled into that one-way street to ram that guy, and that's precisely what he did.

It was pretty miraculous he didn't kill them both.
CalLT, not to inflame this anymore, but you say what he did is wrong. Well the fact is it wasn't (unless his department has an SOP stating otherwise) by the state and federal laws, which is the rule book Texas police have to play by. Just because you don't agree with the actions in this case do not make the officer wrong, as many a politician and or law maker / interpreter has said otherwise. If a 350# defensive tackle sacks the quarterback and the quarterback gets hurt do you blame the defensive tackle, when everything he did was within the rules of the game and established by the NFL? If this happened in California, then maybe he would be wrong, but I don't know California law, but I do know Texas law. I tried to make it clear that this happened in Texas and you need to understand we still shoot fleeing felons here and yes even off of motorcycles that have only committed a traffic offense to start the whole show (it is happening a lot less frequently and spike strips are used more and more often now, but even they can be just as deadly). They are considered felons, because their actions intentionally put innocent people at risk, they put the officers at risk, and they put their own lives in jeopardy. The officers are obligated to stop the risk. You and I can both think of a dozen ways to have ended this without injury to anyone, but the fact is it was ended and no laws criminally or civilly were violated and that is how it gets done here. Morally he may have to deal with some issues and I am sure in a city the size of Watauga they have a review board that will go over this incident for months before policy changes are made or actions are taken, even if SOP's were already in place. But like I said, just because you don't like how the officer handled it doesn't make it wrong here. Again you are blaming the cop instead of the people that made exactly what he did fair game.

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #36 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 8:45 am
Senior Member
 
hoog62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Posts: 2,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
CalLT, not to inflame this anymore, but you say what he did is wrong. Well the fact is it wasn't (unless his department has an SOP stating otherwise) by the state and federal laws, which is the rule book Texas police have to play by.
Wrong and illegal are not necessarily synonymous.

Dave Hoogerland

'08 Triumph Tiger 1050 ABS
'02 K1200LTC "The Silver Snoopy" (gone but not forgotten)
'08 Can-Am Spyder "???"

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
hoog62 is offline  
post #37 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 9:10 am
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 469
So, if you're riding pillion and the bike runs a red light and your driver decides to run from the cops what do you do? Unless the bike is running slowly you'd be crazy to jump off or to try and throw the bike off balance - probably kill yourself.

Irrespective of Texas law the cop deliberately attempted to kill an innocent passenger. Just goes to prove that, as usual, the law is an ass.
brianbeemer is offline  
post #38 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 10:23 am
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoog62
Wrong and illegal are not necessarily synonymous.
Dave,

I agree that in the world where people get to sit back and Monday Morning QB and look at all the little details they are not synonymous, but in the cops REAL world there is only black and white on most things " Right = Legal or wrong = Illegal." Not saying there isn't discretion, but right and wrong come down to legal or illegal in the world the cops are forced to play in.

I have gone back and looked at this tape several times, as that is the only information available. There is no radio communication available to us, there is no witness accounts, etc. We don't know how long or how dangerous this pursuit was or where it was headed, but just looking at the tape, the motorcycle had slowed down considerably, probably only after seeing the officer's car literally blocking the intersection as he approached it, but it was not going very fast at impact. The rider tried to go around the attempted road block and the officer "MAY" (again this is only an interpretation based on the tape and my experience) have made a judgement call that this was the slowest speed the bike would be traveling and therefore the least dangers spot to stop the pursuit. I would say with almost certainty that the officers intent and mind set was not to kill anyone, as brianbeemer suggests, but to stop the pursuit, period. Up until then the speeds may have been so fast that tagging the bike would have certainly led to the death of the rider and passenger, so the officers were patient and waited it out, and this location could have set things up to force the bike to slow to a speed less likely to cause fatal injuries (and I know people have died falling off stopped motorcycles so you don't need to go down that road ). Or in other words "The least amount of force necessary to effect the arrest and terminate the pursuit." This could have even been at a location chosen by a supervisor to terminate the chase. I am taking the officers side on this (until there is more info available) because I stopped a motorcycle in a similar fashion as he was headed towards the high school football stadium during a game. The local police supervisor said hit him when he reaches the intersections of XYZ, because it will be the only place he will slow down before he gets to the stadium, or shoot him if he gets past there (remember...Texas). I got beside the bike and the Rookie I was training had the rider dead in the sites of the gauge, but I was able to hook the rear wheel when he slowed first, which caused some serious injuries. The least amount of necessary force to effect the arrest and terminate the pursuit and completely legal (and this was even before the Supreme Court Ruling) based on the rule book I had to play by (yes the one that says Right = Legal and Wrong = Illegal book). From this tape we don't know a lot about what had happened before or what was ahead, so making judgement calls on the officer based solely on what we see is baseless (and yes that even includes mine ), but just giving out food for thought.

Again try to understand the only person with ANY liability in this situation was the rider, so if you still think it was wrong blame the people who make the laws instead of those that are chosen enforce them, please!!!

And where the hell is MY donut Patdcopt?!?!?!?!?!

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #39 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 11:25 am
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Newark, CA, USA
Posts: 302
This thread has pretty much run its course, but I'm going to add one more point before I STFU.

The romantic notion that all people who run from the cops are dangerous criminals who need to be taken off the street at all cost is falling by the wayside. More and more departments have been examining their pursuit policies, and deciding that, in many cases, when a chase gets to a certain point, it just ain't worth it.

The below exerpt is from an article in "The Kentucky Post."

"Each year in the U.S., 300 to 400 people die in such car chases. Though most of the deaths occur to occupants in the car being chased, nearly that many are killed in other cars on the road or on the roadside near the pursuit. Fewer than 10 pursuing police officers die in car chases annually, according to FARS data.

"And, fewer than 17 percent of suspects fleeing police are serious felony offenders.

"Those numbers provide insight into so many departments are reevaluating and rewriting their guidelines for car chases."

Full text here: http://www.policedriving.com/dangero...uitarticle.htm

It's an important topic that is worth examining.

But the idea that a cop should be allowed to deliberately ram a bike go well beyond that. At that point it is no longer a chase. It is attempted murder, nothing less. And there can be no justification, IMHO.
CalLT is offline  
post #40 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 11:40 am
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalLT
This thread has pretty much run its course
Oh man CalLT I couldn't agree more, but just sit back and watch. There are still a few out there that haven't even begun to chime in yet, you know, the cop bashers, and they WILL chime in. I know from your past posts you are not in this catagory and everything you have said is correct.....for California. I do appreciate the fact that you said "The idea that a cop should be allowed to deliberately ram a bike" because that is the facts here. The cops are allowed to do it. Now right or wrong it was not the cops who wrote those laws that do allow it.

Also, FYI the recent Supreme Court's ruling is causing a lot of departments to rethink and reverse their "No pursuit policies" and are going back to allowing pursuits. The only reason they had the no pursuit policy in the first place was due to the liability issues and now that has been lifted. So you could see more and more of this down the road.

Moral of the story....if you see the lights behind you, pull over...get tazed and go directly to jail witout passing go or collecting the $200.

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #41 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 11:44 am
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Newark, CA, USA
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
Moral of the story....if you see the lights behind you, pull over...get tazed and go directly to jail witout passing go or collecting the $200.
Don't taze me, bro!
CalLT is offline  
post #42 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 12:54 pm
Senior Member
 
hoog62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Posts: 2,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
Dave,

I agree that in the world where people get to sit back and Monday Morning QB and look at all the little details they are not synonymous, but in the cops REAL world there is only black and white on most things " Right = Legal or wrong = Illegal." Not saying there isn't discretion, but right and wrong come down to legal or illegal in the world the cops are forced to play in.

I have gone back and looked at this tape several times, as that is the only information available. There is no radio communication available to us, there is no witness accounts, etc. We don't know how long or how dangerous this pursuit was or where it was headed, but just looking at the tape, the motorcycle had slowed down considerably, probably only after seeing the officer's car literally blocking the intersection as he approached it, but it was not going very fast at impact. The rider tried to go around the attempted road block and the officer "MAY" (again this is only an interpretation based on the tape and my experience) have made a judgement call that this was the slowest speed the bike would be traveling and therefore the least dangers spot to stop the pursuit. I would say with almost certainty that the officers intent and mind set was not to kill anyone, as brianbeemer suggests, but to stop the pursuit, period. Up until then the speeds may have been so fast that tagging the bike would have certainly led to the death of the rider and passenger, so the officers were patient and waited it out, and this location could have set things up to force the bike to slow to a speed less likely to cause fatal injuries (and I know people have died falling off stopped motorcycles so you don't need to go down that road ). Or in other words "The least amount of force necessary to effect the arrest and terminate the pursuit." This could have even been at a location chosen by a supervisor to terminate the chase. I am taking the officers side on this (until there is more info available) because I stopped a motorcycle in a similar fashion as he was headed towards the high school football stadium during a game. The local police supervisor said hit him when he reaches the intersections of XYZ, because it will be the only place he will slow down before he gets to the stadium, or shoot him if he gets past there (remember...Texas). I got beside the bike and the Rookie I was training had the rider dead in the sites of the gauge, but I was able to hook the rear wheel when he slowed first, which caused some serious injuries. The least amount of necessary force to effect the arrest and terminate the pursuit and completely legal (and this was even before the Supreme Court Ruling) based on the rule book I had to play by (yes the one that says Right = Legal and Wrong = Illegal book). From this tape we don't know a lot about what had happened before or what was ahead, so making judgement calls on the officer based solely on what we see is baseless (and yes that even includes mine ), but just giving out food for thought.

Again try to understand the only person with ANY liability in this situation was the rider, so if you still think it was wrong blame the people who make the laws instead of those that are chosen enforce them, please!!!

And where the hell is MY donut Patdcopt?!?!?!?!?!

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I noticed you've glossed over the part where he was suspended for 60 days (violation of policy). Wrong is a done deal here.

IMO, living in a real world where my judgement isn't clouded by being geeked up on adrenalin, running your squad car into a motorcycle carrying an innocent passenger is wrong. The only assumption is that the officer knew there was a passenger on the bike, and I highly doubt that tidbit was left out by the officer that started the pursuit.


Liability and wrongdoing aren't necessarily synonymous either.

Dave Hoogerland

'08 Triumph Tiger 1050 ABS
'02 K1200LTC "The Silver Snoopy" (gone but not forgotten)
'08 Can-Am Spyder "???"

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
hoog62 is offline  
post #43 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 5:25 pm
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoog62
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I noticed you've glossed over the part where he was suspended for 60 days (violation of policy). Wrong is a done deal here.

IMO, living in a real world where my judgement isn't clouded by being geeked up on adrenalin, running your squad car into a motorcycle carrying an innocent passenger is wrong. The only assumption is that the officer knew there was a passenger on the bike, and I highly doubt that tidbit was left out by the officer that started the pursuit.


Liability and wrongdoing aren't necessarily synonymous either.
Why Dave you are absolutely right. I never once mentioned anything in any of these posts about Department Policy or SOP's did I...not more than four times I'm sure, so yeah I "glossed over it" didn't I.

Now O wise one would you care to share your inside knowledge with us a little more and tell us exactly WHAT violation of department policy he was suspended for? You see I looked at everything I could find and all it says is one officer was suspended for 60 days and the other was suspended for 15 days for a violation of department policy. So, what violation are you saying makes the officer wrong for his actions in the pursuit and where did you find it please? What violation was it that caused him to loose 60 days pay? Please tell us and share your wisdom. Or could that be another one of those assumptions you mentioned?

Let me give you a little insight into how it works here Dave and save you the trouble of more second guessing. Here if an officer violates the law (attempted murder is one suggestion I read in this thread) he is put on what's called "Indefinite Suspension" which is a fancy term for, fired and just waiting on the verdict. If an officer is convicted of said crime he is considered to be on "Indefinite Suspension" or using the same term for, pack your shit and get out...or you are going to jail, but in either event your days as a police officer are over. Now if an officer is suspended for a term it means he violated some rule the department has that controls an officer's conduct both on and off duty and there are hundreds of them, which are called Department Policy or Standard Operating Procedures (SOP's). Which means the violation is not a crime, but a violation of the code of conduct. Why am I telling you this you may ask, because I was involved in a shooting, which was 100% by the book, completely justified and I was No-Billed by the Grand Jury (no charges were brought up against me), but I did something the next day that was against the agencies SOP's and it got me a 14 day suspension. The press published the story with a headline "Agent linked to shooting suspended for cause!" and they had a field day with it. Others were second guessing me and assuming the shoot was a bad one. I was getting it from all directions, because the paper said I was suspended for cause and no one within the agency (those that actually knew all the facts not the people on lists who assumed, you know..like you're doing here) would say what the suspension was for. Now the interesting thing about all that is the suspension came about, because a know it all reporter who just knew I must have done something wrong, and was ready to ruin my integrity (you know, kind of like you Dave), asked me "What gave me the right to be judge, jury, and executioner?" and I went off on him. The agency had an SOP about talking with the press after a sensitive incident (of which they consider a shooting to be sensitive...go figure), so they sent me away for 14 days to cool down. Everyone jumped to the wrong conclusion and it could have jeapordized my entire carrier. The suspension had absolutly nothing to do with the shoot, but everyone jumped to the wrong conclusion.

Now I am just going to guess here, which I assume will be alright with you Dave, cause that seems to be what you did. My guess is going to be based on my experience of 20 + in law enforcement and the information available at this time. Your guess was based on........... Well anyway, in the news paper articles a Lieutenant, from Wautauga, is quoted as saying "The officer did everything he could to get out of the speeding motorcycle's way" and then later the reporter rebuffs this based on the dash cam you saw and some were so quick to execute the officer for. Now comes the guess on my part: It is my experience both in federal and municipal law enforcement that if you lie to a supervisor, that supervisor is going to get a pound of flesh from you over it, usually resulting in a 7 to 30 day suspension, but if said supervisor is made to look like a complete jackass on the 6:00 news, your butt will be swinging with at least a 45 day suspension, so, again this is just a guess, but the possibility exists that the officer that hit the bike lied to his supervisor about the accident initially, and said he tried to avoid the colision but the dash cam showed his actions didn't match his statement, his Lieutenant gets made into a complete fool on the news, so that officer got 60 days off and the other officer may have gotten the 15 for backing up the story and there could have been no violation of policy actually relating to the officers actions at the time of the accident, remember it was NOT a crime.

Now the department could very well have a pursuit policy and the officer could be guilty of violating a portion of that, but my point is there are still a whole lot of facts that the public, and that includes us, doesn't know yet, so to say the officer is wrong for his actions in the pursuit is way premature. You may not like what you saw and you may think it was wrong the way it was handled, but the fact remains in this state, unless the officer's department has a policy stating otherwise, he was completely legal (and yes Dave that does mean not liable). If his department does have a pursuit policy and he violated it, that is the only thing he did wrong and his suspension (if that is what it is for) is his punishment. Why can't you wait for the facts before you crucify the officer, remember even cops are innocent until proven guilty. All you have seen is a video tape. Now when all the facts come out there could, and there always is, be a lot more to it than that, but until then WE can't say it was right or wrong. So is it asking too much to hold off on the cop bashing....again?

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #44 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 5:44 pm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: , ,
Posts: 347
Hang em both

I would treat that as attempted murder (twice, rider and passenger)
There is no other name for it


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
axamax is offline  
post #45 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 7:30 pm
IBR# 366
 
meese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: West Linn, OR
Posts: 16,417
Garage
And once again, the discussion rapidly devolves into "how does this affect me? Jerry and the other LEOs can see themselves in the cop's shoes (or have been there), so they are quick to defend his actions. Others can see themselves as victims over overzealous LEOs (or have been there), so they assume that the officer is automatically at fault.

And no one has all the facts, period, so we're all guessing based on our own previous experiences and preconceptions. Isn't the internet fun?

Ken
Pacific NorthWet
'13 Dark Graphite Metallic K16GTLD, 24K miles
'09 Magnesium Beige Metallic K13GT, 63K miles
'03 Anthracite Metallic K12LTC, 66K miles
'02 Mauve Metallic K12LTC, 106K miles and sold
BMWLT#143, IBA# 366, MOA# 111996, SCMA# 24032


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Some people see the gas tank as half empty. Some see it as half full. All I care is that I know where the next tankful is coming from...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
meese is offline  
post #46 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 7:38 pm
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by axamax
I would treat that as attempted murder (twice, rider and passenger)
There is no other name for it
Why thank for your example and for making my point so eloquently axamax

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #47 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 7:41 pm
Gold Supporter
 
Lonewuff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnolia, TX, USA
Posts: 3,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by meese
And once again, the discussion rapidly devolves into "how does this affect me? Jerry and the other LEOs can see themselves in the cop's shoes (or have been there), so they are quick to defend his actions. Others can see themselves as victims over overzealous LEOs (or have been there), so they assume that the officer is automatically at fault.

And no one has all the facts, period, so we're all guessing based on our own previous experiences and preconceptions. Isn't the internet fun?
Oh blow it out your butt Meese!!!

Wow you said what I was trying to say in a heck of a lot less words.

Jerry
Look in the wolf's eyes and what do you see--A guardian spirit or fierce enemy?
2008 FLHTCU White Pearl

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Lonewuff is offline  
post #48 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 7:48 pm
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 57
LoneWuff

Jerry, I do not know if I will ever have the opportunity to meet you in person but I hope I will have the chance to. Just to shake your hand.

You have the patience of Job. I say that because I long ago I lost the passion to explain police procedure, differences in criminal intent and civil liability to others.

Post after post you have kept your cool, explained the law, your reasoning and outcomes. I know first hand what that looks like on the street while others around you are in a state of hysteria. With out doubt you are true cops cop and a respected member of the law enforcement community.

This board does not know how lucky they are to have you respond to these post. To qualify that statement, I say that, not to put down anyone on this board or anyone that does not agree with your statements but to say there is in fact a lot of police officers that do not have your level of professionalism, knowledge of the law and its intent, as well as respect for others and self.

I don't make those statements lightly as I am harder on cops than most as I expect and demand professionalism at the highest. And the first to praise it when I see it.

Make you a deal. Send me a PM with your contact information and I WILL find a way to get you that donut. You have damn well earned it.
Patdcop is offline  
post #49 of 49 Old Feb 5th, 2008, 7:58 pm
Senior Member
 
hoog62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Posts: 2,862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
Why Dave you are absolutely right.
Thanks Jerry.

Seriously, I hope all that condesention makes you feel better because I'm pretty imune to it.

Now...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewuff
I am sure in a city the size of Watauga they have a review board that will go over this incident for months before policy changes are made or actions are taken, even if SOP's were already in place.
Each department has their own policy, right? This is the only reference to Watauga policy I found in your posts. If I missed the other three or more, I apologize. I did however read about a half dozen "blame the lawmakers, not the cop" lines, and more than one reference to the supreme court.

My opinion was, and still is, what he did was wrong. I don't care if he had laws allowing it, or a decision relieving him and his department of liability. I feel he was wrong for hitting the bike knowing there was an innocent passenger on board.

From the story:

"I hit him," Officer Allen is heard saying on the video.

The officer who started the pursuit appears a few seconds later and is overheard saying to Officer Allen: "What were you thinking?"

He seems to think it was the wrong move, and he was there. I'll go with that...

Dave Hoogerland

'08 Triumph Tiger 1050 ABS
'02 K1200LTC "The Silver Snoopy" (gone but not forgotten)
'08 Can-Am Spyder "???"

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
hoog62 is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the BMW Luxury Touring Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
07 Rear main seal leak chucksbluelt K1200LT 3 Oct 7th, 2007 6:32 pm
Hang on or Jump Off jniemuth K1200LT 20 May 22nd, 2007 1:15 pm
If winter is going to hang on awhile... dlbushey Chit Chat 2 Apr 7th, 2007 11:59 pm
steel cable to hang on to the mirrors davek1 K1200LT 6 Jun 16th, 2006 1:02 am
How NOT to hang off a bike! messenger13 Chit Chat 20 Oct 5th, 2005 7:29 pm

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome