JSO Negligence Sends Woman Flying through Brick Wall

Started by ChriswUfGator, November 02, 2010, 07:34:51 AM

ChriswUfGator

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 02, 2010, 02:52:01 PM
Quote from: Springfielder on November 02, 2010, 02:22:15 PM
Non-RedNeck Westsider, to be perfectly honest, it doesn't matter the speed of either vehicle, the facts remain: the officer failed to properly yield and struck the womans truck, causing the accident. So unless someone here is trained in accident reconstruction with all of the exact details as gathered by the authorities, speed remains irrelevant and does not change the fact that the officer was at fault.

Speed is quite relevant, as are other facts that aren't in the story:
Did cop have lights/siren? - Should she have noticed him before he made it to the intersection?
Which side of California Ave was he turning from? - Did he travel across 3 lanes and a median before hitting her?
What time of day did the accident occur? - How was the visiblity?
How fast was she driving? - Why didn't she start slowing before the collision?
Did she get clipped in the front or the back?

Nowhere in the story that I read does it say that the officer is at fault but rather 'violated ROW', but the article did say the lady hit the median and landed halfway in a parking lot.  That tells me, with zero traffic-accident-reconstruction-background, that she was going a lot faster than 45mph.  I will stand by my comments and will be willing to bet that the officer won't be found at fault and the lady will get a too fast for conditions / failure to yeild to emergency vehicle sort of ticket.

You make no sense. The cop violated the other driver's ROW. End of story. At fault.


Non-RedNeck Westsider

Did you read your driver's handbook?

Emergency Vehicles

Pedestrians and drivers must yield the right-of-way to law enforcement cars, fire engines and other emergency vehicles using sirens and/or flashing lights. Pull over to the closest edge of the roadway immediately and stop until the emergency vehicle has passed. Do not block intersections.


What hasn't come up yet is whether he had his lights or sirens on at the time of the accident.

Next story....
A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
-Douglas Adams

Springfielder

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 02, 2010, 03:51:18 PM
Did you read your driver's handbook?

Emergency Vehicles

Pedestrians and drivers must yield the right-of-way to law enforcement cars, fire engines and other emergency vehicles using sirens and/or flashing lights. Pull over to the closest edge of the roadway immediately and stop until the emergency vehicle has passed. Do not block intersections.


What hasn't come up yet is whether he had his lights or sirens on at the time of the accident.

Next story....
Yes, I know the handbook quite well. and you're quote is all well and good, had the officer been responding to an emergency call using the emergency lights/sirens, but they weren't. So you can quote the handbook all you want, but it still doesn't shift the blame to the woman who was hit by the officer who failed to properly yield the right of way.


Non-RedNeck Westsider

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 02, 2010, 03:51:18 PM
What hasn't come up yet is whether he had his lights or sirens on at the time of the accident.

Quote from: Springfielder on November 02, 2010, 04:01:25 PM
....had the officer been responding to an emergency call using the emergency lights/sirens, but they weren't.

This wasn't in the article at the time of posting - has it been updated?

This entire time, you can go back and read, I have only asked relevant questions such as the one above.  Because if the officer had lights or siren on - he gets right of way.  If he didn't, but was responding to a call, he will still probably be not at fault because he had to cross 3 lanes of traffic and a turning median!  If he was turning the direction that you said he was (but not yet written in the article)...
QuoteQuote from: Springfielder on Today at 03:21:52 PM
The officer turned left from southbound California Avenue onto eastbound 103rd. The cruiser clipped the truck which was heading eastbound.

It's tough to make a point when others choose to make up some truths and omit others.

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
-Douglas Adams

Non-RedNeck Westsider

Maybe the TU should re-write their entire piece, hell, I'll do it for them just for you.

There was an unfortunate accident, earlier, when a JSO officer was throwing caution to the wind and blew through a stop sign and over 3 lanes of traffic only to hit a poor soul in a truck.  The impact of the evil JSO officer caused this poor lady, who could not have been driving over the speed limit nor distracted in any way, to ramp over the median, flipping her truck which landed approximately 75 ft away in a parking lot - stopping only after slamming into the side of an empty building.  FHP should have their investigation wrapped up within a few weeks, the officer involved in the accident is currently suspended without pay and housed in Duval County Jail pending the outcome of the investigation.  No bond was set. 
A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
-Douglas Adams

duvaldude08

Jaguars 2.0

Springfielder

Just what did I make up or omit? There was no mention in any of the articles I've read that said the officer was responding to an emergency call with lights/sirens, therefore, there's absolutely no reason to assume they were. You're trying to turn it into a situation, that it was not. The article
The directions I posted that both vehicles were traveling, were stated in the article in the Times Union, you can verify that yourself.
QuotePickup crashes into Westside building; police officer at fault, investigators say

A Jacksonville police cruiser caused a collision Saturday that sent a pickup crashing into a Westside building, investigators say.

Shards of broken glass littered the sidewalk in front of Tint Specialist West in the 8500 block of 103rd Street after the crash. The nose of a battered Mazda pickup truck sat just inside the shop.

The driver and lone occupant of the pickup, who wasn't identified at the scene, was sent to Orange Park Medical Center with minor injuries, said Sgt. R.A. Harville of the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office. There were no other injuries.

Harville gave this account: The police cruiser was attempting to turn left at 11 a.m. from southbound California Avenue onto eastbound 103rd. The cruiser clipped the eastbound-heading pickup, jolting it into westbound lanes of traffic and into the tint shop.

"The police vehicle violated the right of way," Harville said.

There is no traffic signal at the intersection.

He didn't provide the identity of the police officer. The matter likely will go before the police review board, he said.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2010-10-30/story/pickup-crashes-westside-building-police-officer-fault-investigators-say



Springfielder

Quote from: stephendare on November 02, 2010, 04:34:15 PM
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 02, 2010, 04:28:07 PM
Maybe the TU should re-write their entire piece, hell, I'll do it for them just for you.

There was an unfortunate accident, earlier, when a JSO officer was throwing caution to the wind and blew through a stop sign and over 3 lanes of traffic only to hit a poor soul in a truck.  The impact of the evil JSO officer caused this poor lady, who could not have been driving over the speed limit nor distracted in any way, to ramp over the median, flipping her truck which landed approximately 75 ft away in a parking lot - stopping only after slamming into the side of an empty building.  FHP should have their investigation wrapped up within a few weeks, the officer involved in the accident is currently suspended without pay and housed in Duval County Jail pending the outcome of the investigation.  No bond was set. 

Maybe the problem is that you are apparently trying to rewrite the times union piece in the first place?

I suppose youve pegged Springfielder as another one of the leftists who hates cops, right?
+1


Non-RedNeck Westsider

Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 02, 2010, 02:52:01 PM
Speed is quite relevant, as are other facts that aren't in the story:
Did cop have lights/siren? - Should she have noticed him before he made it to the intersection?
Which side of California Ave was he turning from? - Did he travel across 3 lanes and a median before hitting her?
What time of day did the accident occur? - How was the visiblity?
How fast was she driving? - Why didn't she start slowing before the collision?
Did she get clipped in the front or the back?

Nowhere in the story that I read does it say that the officer is at fault but rather 'violated ROW', but the article did say the lady hit the median and landed halfway in a parking lot.  That tells me, with zero traffic-accident-reconstruction-background, that she was going a lot faster than 45mph.  I will stand by my comments and will be willing to bet that the officer won't be found at fault and the lady will get a too fast for conditions / failure to yeild to emergency vehicle sort of ticket.

I still stand by this statement.  Springfielder, I haven't called or labeled you as anything, nor have I faulted either driver in this accident.  Is it too much to ask a few questions before jumping to conclusions?  Not one of my questions above was answered in the article written.  Springfielder, you brought 'facts' to the table that have not been verified yet anywhere but from your posts:

Quote from: Springfielder on November 02, 2010, 03:21:52 PM
Visibility: clear
Quote from: Springfielder on November 02, 2010, 03:21:52 PM
The speed of the car hit does not play into the factor, as she was the one hit while driving legally in a proper lane.
Why should she have slowed down, the officer came out of a side street and clipped her in the rear of the truck. Had she slowed down, he probably would've broad-sided the truck
Quote from: Springfielder on November 02, 2010, 03:21:52 PMThe officer turned left from southbound California Avenue onto eastbound 103rd. The cruiser clipped the truck which was heading eastbound.
Quote from: Springfielder on November 02, 2010, 03:21:52 PM
There's no report that the officer had emergency lights/siren, therefore, there was nothing for her to yield to, she had the right of way.
The statement DIRECTLY above means that we don't know who had ROW yet, AND THE REST OF THE QUOTES FROM YOU ARE A COMPLETE FABRICATION based on the article that I read.

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
-Douglas Adams

Shwaz

#24
 :D

Maybe they should re-write this because there's no way (without a strategically placed Evil Knievil ramp)  you could launch a pick-up truck off a median, across 3 lanes & commercial driveway and land half way through the building as reported...

QuoteHorne said she ramped up the median, going airborne across three lanes and landing halfway into an empty store front.
And though I long to embrace, I will not replace my priorities: humour, opinion, a sense of compassion, creativity and a distaste for fashion.

Non-RedNeck Westsider

Quote from: Shwaz on November 02, 2010, 04:57:33 PM
:D

Maybe they should re-write this because there's no way (without strategically placed Evil Knievil ramp)  you could launch a pick-up truck off a median, across 3 lanes & commercial driveway and land half way through the building as reported...

QuoteHorne said she ramped up the median, going airborne across three lanes and landing halfway into an empty store front.


Holy Shi+, someone without a bleeding heart looking at the facts presented.  +1,000
A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
-Douglas Adams

Coolyfett

Quote from: duvaldude08 on November 02, 2010, 04:29:15 PM
Yeah JSO has made alot of "mistakes" lately.

Yea....JSO is like the Evil Empire & the uptowners are the rebelion lol. Did someone get raided or something?? Let me in on this "I hate JSO" campaign....
Mike Hogan Destruction Eruption!

Springfielder

We must be reading completely different articles of accidents that happened in completely different cities. For I went as far as to quote the article for you, which states the direction, and it quotes the investigator as saying the officer failed to properly yield the right of way...and since all you have to do is look at the photo from the accident and you can see the weather's clear....wasn't raining, wasn't snowing, no fog...looks like sunshine to me.

There's nowhere in any of the articles that even suggests the officer was on an emergency call, so why would anyone make that assumption, other than with an attempt to sway the fault onto the woman who was hit. The woman, irregardless of the speed in which she was traveling, although I believe she said was 45mph, which is a pretty good clip...and given that she was hit by another vehicle (who did not state their speed), it would most certainly be easy enough to have caused her vehicle to pop over that median and slam into the wall.

So where are the fabrications? You are the one trying to alter the reported facts of the incident into this reckless woman hurling down the road and an officer with lights/siren on a dire emergency trying to work their way out onto the road and hit this truck going faster than the speed of light...and it was her fault....Hmmm, I seemed to have missed all those real facts in the article.


Live_Oak

How does a deployed airbag cause a seatbelt to become unbuckled?  I don't see how this is possible.

Springfielder

Quote from: Coolyfett on November 02, 2010, 05:05:26 PM
Quote from: duvaldude08 on November 02, 2010, 04:29:15 PM
Yeah JSO has made alot of "mistakes" lately.

Yea....JSO is like the Evil Empire & the uptowners are the rebelion lol. Did someone get raided or something?? Let me in on this "I hate JSO" campaign....
who is claiming they hate JSO? Never came from my posts, in fact, I stated that I support JSO.