Speeding cop on computer kills kid on bike... Gets a "careless driving" ticket

[Shockwave]

Kid was riding to fucking school.

It's not like he was running around gangbanging.

Cop should serve automatic year in prison.

Regardless of speed he should of seen that kid at that speed limited

Why can't people admit they just don't pay attention when driving.

That was kind of my point....

Dudes going to get charged.... speed was largely irrelevant... he hit a kid on a bike. Hell lrobably be charged with involuntary /vehicular manslaughter or something, and the speed is going to have next to zero to do with his guilt.

If he couldnt see the kid, thats one thing. If he could, hell be found guilty.

[Nails]

[240 is Back]

Eh... its not really a black and white line on speeding.

Okay.  So speeding doesn't automatically assign fault/blame?   Confirmed?   that's my main Q here. If the kid did nothing but ride to school, and I hit him, and I say "well, I was probably going 50 in the 45, but I didn't see him"...

Am I going be charged there?  Or will they say "Hey, it's only 5, you probably couldn't have stopped anyway, it's cool".

See, I think even at 46 or 47mph, you are speeding, you are operating that vehicle illegally,

[240 is Back]

If he couldnt see the kid, thats one thing. If he could, hell be found guilty.

it's clear he didn't try to kill a kid... he screeched his breaks and left 30 or 40 feet of hard skid mark, still hitting the kid hard enough to destory headlight and launch kid out of site - witnesses saw no kid... who knows how far the cop launched him (AFTER braking for 40 feet). 

Sixty mph wouldn't surprise me in the least.  But yes, he did try to stop, he did see the kid, just too late.

[Andy Griffin]

it's clear he didn't try to kill a kid... he screeched his breaks and left 30 or 40 feet of hard skid mark, still hitting the kid hard enough to destory headlight and launch kid out of site - witnesses saw no kid... who knows how far the cop launched him (AFTER braking for 40 feet). 

Sixty mph wouldn't surprise me in the least.  But yes, he did try to stop, he did see the kid, just too late.

did he leave any markings on the road?

[Deacon Jeschin]

50mph in a 45 is nothing. 55 in a 45 would probably make a bit of difference. 60mph in a 45 could be considered reckless driving by police standards.

If the kid didnt have reflectors and couldnt be seen, cop probably shouldnt be charged unless he was going in excess of 15mph over. Now, if the kid DID have all the proper gear, hell probably be charged no matter what.

The speed of the vehicle shouldn't matter except to bring additional charges against the driver.

If the cop was driving 10 miles an hour UNDER the speed limit and hit the kid he should still be charged...as any civilian would.  He was not in control of his vehicle.

He struck and killed a person.  If proven he was speeding, that would be called a contributing factor to the crime.

[Option D]

wow thats fucked up..
the scary part is it might get investegated and go to trial and all that, And the cop will get off...

[Shockwave]

it's clear he didn't try to kill a kid... he screeched his breaks and left 30 or 40 feet of hard skid mark, still hitting the kid hard enough to destory headlight and launch kid out of site - witnesses saw no kid... who knows how far the cop launched him (AFTER braking for 40 feet). 

Sixty mph wouldn't surprise me in the least.  But yes, he did try to stop, he did see the kid, just too late.

Thats not quite what i was saying...

Speed is irrelevant as he hit the kid decisively... its not like he just barely clipped him after screeching to a halt. Hes going to be charged. The only way he may get out of it is if the kid didnt have visibility on the bike in low light situations.  

How fast he was going isnt going to determine if hes guilty of killing this kid. Its a side issue that will only come into play if he legitimatley can argue that he could not see the kid. I

f thats the case, and the prosecution can prove that the kid only died because he was going over the speed limit and it effected his braking time, then it may effect his verdict.

If the kid had reflectors, was on the right side of fhe road, etc, then hes going to be guilty because he should have seen him.

I dont think this guy is automatically guilty just because his vehicle broke the plane of 45mph... thats a serious oversimplification of what transpired.

Sometimes in cases like this, if they can prove the kid couldnt be seen and the officers speed didnt adversly effect his brake time, that the guy will get slapped with a relatively minor charge like reckless driving....

[Agnostic007]

I react strongly when I see cops speeding in non-emergency situations. The police are not above the law.

Me too

[Archer77]

Me too

By brother is a police officer for over a decade and he hates it too. Many of the feelings I have towards law enforcement, good and bad, come from the experiences hes had.

[Agnostic007]

There are 7 pages of the accident investigation. Without seeing all of it we're left trying to determine fault with a few bits of information.

1. The cop was going over the speed limit (no idea if he was on an emergency call or just driving to breakfast)
2. The article said the bike did have lights, he was wearing no helmet
3. Vehicle struck bike on front left bumper. Reporter speculates it might mean kid crossed in front of vehicle.

So I have to play the what if game...

If the kid was driving down the road legally, lights on and the cop hit him then I would imagine "Driving too fast for conditions" would be easy to prove because someone died because he couldn't stop or evade in time. Here in Texas, the speed limit can be irrelevant. If you are driving 40 in a 60 and the roads are iced and you lose control.. you're at fault. So even at 50mph in a 45mph zone, if you are over driving your headlights, that's on you.  It's tragic, the cop certainly didn't intend to run over a kid going to school but when someone dies over your mistake, then the consequences are harsh.

If the kid for whatever reason, veered into his lane at a time where it would not allow a reasonable person to avoid hitting him then that's not on the cop.     

[240 is Back]

did he leave any markings on the road?

yes he left markings on the road.  That day, reporters said skid marks were 20 to 40 feet.  later, they said 30 feet.  They didn't release pics of the skid marks, so I dunno.  But they definitely said he locked the brakes and tried valiantly not to hit the kid.

Also, they let the cop work for a week after the accident, THEN they moved him to paid administrative work.   I can't imagine a person is mentally "right" to drive to work the next day on the same road he killed a kid a day earlier.  They waited a week to move him.  he was on active duty they next day, they said.

I support law enforcement in a big way.  But I dislike speeders greatly.  I drive a big ol car and I never speed.  Roads here are full of idiots and old people... i *need* to stay at 45mph because I have to be able to react to the morons on the road that come out of nowhere, brake suddenly, or are speeding on their own.    one ticket can be a few hundred bucks, not worth it to go 55 when I can go 45 and spend an extra few minutes listening to my "learn spanish" mp3s or review some Jack Johnson lyrics in my head as I drive.  

I see cops speed daily, and I admit, it makes my blood boil.  They don't give a shit, but they will stop us for the same thing, ruin our day, give tickets, beat our asses lol, etc.

I guess I see speeding as one of the only things where there's blatant abuse by lae enforcement in plain sight and nobody says anything. if a cop was smoking pot in his car, it'd be huge news.  if a cop was banging hooker in broud daylight, it'd be huge news.  But a cop can go 70 in a 45 on a daily basis and eh, it's only a half-ton vehicle doing 102 feet PER SECOND.   I dont get it.

[Shockwave]

There are 7 pages of the accident investigation. Without seeing all of it we're left trying to determine fault with a few bits of information.

1. The cop was going over the speed limit (no idea if he was on an emergency call or just driving to breakfast)
2. The article said the bike did have lights, he was wearing no helmet
3. Vehicle struck bike on front left bumper. Reporter speculates it might mean kid crossed in front of vehicle.

So I have to play the what if game...

If the kid was driving down the road legally, lights on and the cop hit him then I would imagine "Driving too fast for conditions" would be easy to prove because someone died because he couldn't stop or evade in time. Here in Texas, the speed limit can be irrelevant. If you are driving 40 in a 60 and the roads are iced and you lose control.. you're at fault. So even at 50mph in a 45mph zone, if you are over driving your headlights, that's on you.  It's tragic, the cop certainly didn't intend to run over a kid going to school but when someone dies over your mistake, then the consequences are harsh.

If the kid for whatever reason, veered into his lane at a time where it would not allow a reasonable person to avoid hitting him then that's not on the cop.     

Pretty much my thinking.

240s arguments is that it doesnt matter what the kid did, whether he pulled in front, or whether he pulled into the road and stopped.... since the cop was speedig, even 5 over, hes automatically guilty.

I cant see that sticking.

[dario73]

If the kid was black then it was his fault according to getbig experts.

Did the kid rob a store and assault the police officer? No? Then it wasn't his fault.

[Agnostic007]

yes he left markings on the road.  That day, reporters said skid marks were 20 to 40 feet.  later, they said 30 feet.  They didn't release pics of the skid marks, so I dunno.  But they definitely said he locked the brakes and tried valiantly not to hit the kid.

Also, they let the cop work for a week after the accident, THEN they moved him to paid administrative work.   I can't imagine a person is mentally "right" to drive to work the next day on the same road he killed a kid a day earlier.  They waited a week to move him.  he was on active duty they next day, they said.

I support law enforcement in a big way.  But I dislike speeders greatly.  I drive a big ol car and I never speed.  Roads here are full of idiots and old people... i *need* to stay at 45mph because I have to be able to react to the morons on the road that come out of nowhere, brake suddenly, or are speeding on their own.    one ticket can be a few hundred bucks, not worth it to go 55 when I can go 45 and spend an extra few minutes listening to my "learn spanish" mp3s or review some Jack Johnson lyrics in my head as I drive.  

I see cops speed daily, and I admit, it makes my blood boil.  They don't give a shit, but they will stop us for the same thing, ruin our day, give tickets, beat our asses lol, etc.

I guess I see speeding as one of the only things where there's blatant abuse by lae enforcement in plain sight and nobody says anything. if a cop was smoking pot in his car, it'd be huge news.  if a cop was banging hooker in broud daylight, it'd be huge news.  But a cop can go 70 in a 45 on a daily basis and eh, it's only a half-ton vehicle doing 102 feet PER SECOND.   I dont get it.

Couldn't agree with your more on the speeding. I even get pissed when I see a cop not use their blinker to change lanes. We are supposed to set the example, which in my view means we drive like everyone is supposed to drive, otherwise we're hypocrites

[Var City]

It was probably junior

[240 is Back]

If the kid for whatever reason, veered into his lane at a time where it would not allow a reasonable person to avoid hitting him then that's not on the cop.    

dash cam would show that.   they all have them here.  

and the way local media has been on the police's side (blaming road conditions, citing all these new safety programs instead of talking about the speeding), I'm guessing if the dashcam showed the kid was at fault, it's all we would have heard about for the last week.  

[240 is Back]

Pretty much my thinking.

240s arguments is that it doesnt matter what the kid did, whether he pulled in front, or whether he pulled into the road and stopped.... since the cop was speedig, even 5 over, hes automatically guilty.

I cant see that sticking.

That's what I thought... if a drunk driver hits a jaywalker, they charge the drunk, even if the dude was in the middle of the street. 

but your answer is, "it depends". 

[calfzilla]

There are 3 different levels of getting to an emergency call, code 1, code 2 and code 3.

Code 1 they only use the lights to go through intersections.

Code 2 they have the lights on the whole time.

Code 3 is they have lights and sirens on.

It depends on the type of emergency they are going to.

A few months ago I saw some cops rushing to a school shooting, I swear they were code 4!  Fuckers were moving.  

[Shockwave]

yes he left markings on the road.  That day, reporters said skid marks were 20 to 40 feet.  later, they said 30 feet.  They didn't release pics of the skid marks, so I dunno.  But they definitely said he locked the brakes and tried valiantly not to hit the kid.

Also, they let the cop work for a week after the accident, THEN they moved him to paid administrative work.   I can't imagine a person is mentally "right" to drive to work the next day on the same road he killed a kid a day earlier.  They waited a week to move him.  he was on active duty they next day, they said.

I support law enforcement in a big way.  But I dislike speeders greatly.  I drive a big ol car and I never speed.  Roads here are full of idiots and old people... i *need* to stay at 45mph because I have to be able to react to the morons on the road that come out of nowhere, brake suddenly, or are speeding on their own.    one ticket can be a few hundred bucks, not worth it to go 55 when I can go 45 and spend an extra few minutes listening to my "learn spanish" mp3s or review some Jack Johnson lyrics in my head as I drive.  

I see cops speed daily, and I admit, it makes my blood boil.  They don't give a shit, but they will stop us for the same thing, ruin our day, give tickets, beat our asses lol, etc.

I guess I see speeding as one of the only things where there's blatant abuse by lae enforcement in plain sight and nobody says anything. if a cop was smoking pot in his car, it'd be huge news.  if a cop was banging hooker in broud daylight, it'd be huge news.  But a cop can go 70 in a 45 on a daily basis and eh, it's only a half-ton vehicle doing 102 feet PER SECOND.   I dont get it.

My experience has been cops wont pull you over for anything less than 10mph over, which i feel is usually a comfortable cushion.

I dont get people who freak out when someone wants to drive faster than they do. Its one thing when someone is really driving recklessly and endangering people.. but if someone is going 52 and you want to sit at 45, let them go around you and on their merry way. (Not necessarily you 240)

We have people up here all the time that will aggressively try and block people who want to go a little faster than the flow of traffic and its fucking dangerous (usually these people are impeding traffic and going under the limit anyways)...

Its just more seattle liberal attitude of "you should drive how i want you to drive and if you dont, ill make you do it".... i cant count the number of accidents ive seen caused by drivers going slower than the flow of traffic and slamming their brakes evertime anyone blinks at them funny.

I almost find 'defensive' drivers more dangerus tha  speeders because theyre constantly reacting to everything around them, which put everyone behind them in a dangerous position, rather than just flowing with traffic

[dario73]

If the kid was black then it was his fault according to getbig experts.

http://madworldnews.com/details-michael-brown-record

[_bruce_]

Amerigga

[Shockwave]

Amerigga

Lolololololol

[The Abdominal Snoman]

Where I live, a 45mph speed limit was only 5mph lower than what the highway/Freeway speed limit was here (50mph) Which is now upped to 55mph. So basically the kid is riding his bike on an "Almost" freeway speeds. The whole situation is a recipe for disaster...

[calfzilla]

Kid probably wasn't gonna write Beethoven's 9th.