[rustynutz]

A WEST Australian policeman whose car struck another vehicle and killed the female driver has been found not guilty of dangerous driving causing her death.
Constable Gareth Hopley, 29, has been on trial in the Perth District Court for the past two weeks, charged over the death of Sharon Ann D'Ercole in April last year.
Ms D'Ercole, 50, died from multiple injuries, while her 16-year-old daughter, who was a passenger, has no memory of the accident.

Read more:

Just another example of "red mist"? 

[Doggie 1]

Bullshit.
Just another example of things going horribly wrong whilst police officers are doing their job (what is expected of them).
I have to say though, that I thought he might be convicted given the result of the crash.
The WA Police Union now want U.S. style laws making those offenders who are fleeing the police responsible for what happens during the ensuing pursuit.
Keep the strict guidelines for police officers that we already have, but bring it on, I reckon. The sooner the better.

[rustynutz]

Just bringing up something that was obviously suggested at the trial, Dave... 

Yes, it is another example of things going horribly wrong and yet another example of police getting away with killing an innocent road user... 

[beerman]

Said so called innocent road user who failed to stop and give way to an emergency vehicle displaying warning alarm as required by law....

Tragic, but you cannot hold the Constable responsible for a motorist who did something unpredictable and stupid. How about for once we hold the grub doing the runner up for some legal consequence for his actions.

[rustynutz]

Said so called innocent road user who failed to stop and give way to an emergency vehicle displaying warning alarm as required by law....

Aren't emergency vehicles suppose to proceed with caution through intersections regardless of whether other vehicles are required to give way when said vehicle is displaying flashing lights etc? 

[beerman]

And so he did.....

A Jury with far more information than we had have found as such....

[rustynutz]

And yet he still hit her hard enough to kill her....

[Doggie 1]

Yes, it is another example of things going horribly wrong and yet another example of police getting away with killing an innocent road user... 

 
 

[Asterix]

It's a tricky thing.

If the police does nothing, we are horrified.

If the police does something, we are also horrified, those few times something goes wrong, and then those bad, bad policemen must be persued in Court, just for doing what's expected from them.

Why is it allways the criminals who have all the rights...

[rustynutz]

Unfortunately deaths as a result of a pursuit happen all to often, Asterix with an average of 18 deaths a year here in Australia... 

[Phil №❶]

We all have rights Asterix, it's just the criminals who are seen to be having their rights upheld, which is how it should be IMO.

As far as this accident is concerned, none of us have enough information to make accusations about the merits and dangers of high speed pursuit.

I'm sure the officer concerned, will have lingering memories of that terrible incident and will have to live with that every conscious hour of the day and night. While the innocents here, by the grace of God, roll over and go back to sleep, peacefully.

[Asterix]

Not guilty until proven guilty. I agree on that.

One innocent life lost is also one life too much.

But, I think the criminals have too many rights in general.

If I surprise a burglar here in my house and I knock him out, I will get a charge for violence, higher penalty than he will get for entering and smashing my private home.
I'm not saying that I should have the rights to kick the living daylights out of him, but he's the one doing something wrong, and if I have to knock him out, to protect my Family and property until the Police get's here, then I think that would be fair.

Some people argue for not chasing those criminals when they set off at high speed because it's dangerous. It is dangerous, but we can't let the criminals know that they just have to drive a bit faster than what's allowed, then the Police won't chase you.

I don't envy those Police officers who have to do those chases, they're just doing their job, and have only a split second to decide whether it's safe or not to enter an intersection at red lights.

If you rob a bank, or whatever, it's not just something that happens, it's a choice you make. When you make that choice, you also chose the consequences.

[Dazzler]

Well said Henning 

[Just Rick]

And so he did.....

A Jury with far more information than we had have found as such....

Looking at both vehicles he certainly DID NOT,you don't cause that much vehicle damage by proceding with caution.
I know I can hear emergency vehicle sirens,but with vehicle noise and if you have a radio on,I can't work out which direction they're coming from until I sight them,when I'm driving.

Personally I can't remember the last time I have heard of either a fire engine nor an ambulance cleaning someone up and killing them,but I have heard of at least four police vehicles,within Australia in the past two years.

Yes it was  terrible accident.

[rustynutz]

Nicely put, Rick! 

[Doggie 1]

Personally I can't remember the last time I have heard of either a fire engine nor an ambulance cleaning someone up and killing them,but I have heard of at least four police vehicles,within Australia in the past two years.

That is probably because fire engines and ambulances don't have cause to chase offenders in stolen cars at high speed, Rick. They respond to incidents and do not chase offenders.

The offenders in this case had stolen someone's expensive Audi and had used it to commit numerous crimes on a crime spree right across the metropolitan area.

So maybe the police should just ignore them and let them do what they want. 

By apprehending these lowlifes, who knows how many other crimes and deaths will be prevented.

Same old argument from some, but the other way is to hand the streets over to the bad guys.

It is very easy to sit in your lounge chairs and criticize the police for what they did, but if these offenders went for three or four or five months without being caught, committing more and more crimes, as they do, then I wonder who would be screaming the loudest about the police not doing their job?

I bet I know.

[rustynutz]

I know you don't agree, Dave but I still reckon a person's life is worth a lot more than a few stolen goods or a stolen car. 

If your wife or kids were killed as a result of a police pursuit would you still be thinking the same?

As I made mention of earlier, on average there are 18 deaths a year that are a result of police pursuits in Australia and I know not all of them are innocent bystanders but still, is that a fair price to be paying to apprehend a few crims?

[Dazzler]

Personally I can't remember the last time I have heard of either a fire engine nor an ambulance cleaning someone up and killing them,but I have heard of at least four police vehicles,within Australia in the past two years.

That is probably because fire engines and ambulances don't have cause to chase offenders in stolen cars at high speed, Rick. They respond to incidents and do not chase offenders.

The offenders in this case had stolen someone's expensive Audi and had used it to commit numerous crimes on a crime spree right across the metropolitan area.

So maybe the police should just ignore them and let them do what they want. 

By apprehending these lowlifes, who knows how many other crimes and deaths will be prevented.

Same old argument from some, but the other way is to hand the streets over to the bad guys.

It is very easy to sit in your lounge chairs and criticize the police for what they did, but if these offenders went for three or four or five months without being caught, committing more and more crimes, as they do, then I wonder who would be screaming the loudest about the police not doing their job?

I bet I know.

Nicely put, Dave! 

[neptune]

Personally I can't remember the last time I have heard of either a fire engine nor an ambulance cleaning someone up and killing them,but I have heard of at least four police vehicles,within Australia in the past two years.

Rick...you don't need to go far back....do you remember back in February this year , when an ambulance with sirens on, got cleaned up on the Tonkin Hwy up near Morley Drive. It ended up on its side and they need another ambulance to attend the scene

[rustynutz]

Not guilty until proven guilty. I agree on that.

I agree mostly....but there are also plenty of guilty people walking the streets that got off on a technicality....

[rustynutz]

Worth a read:

[Doggie 1]

Worth a read:

Well that's ONE side of the argument.

[Doggie 1]

I know you don't agree, Dave but I still reckon a person's life is worth a lot more than a few stolen goods or a stolen car. 

If your wife or kids were killed as a result of a police pursuit would you still be thinking the same?

Tragic as it would be, I would still hold the same view.
Let me ask you one.
Some offenders are seen by police in a stolen car driving recklessly, as they do. But police do not pursue as it has become society's wish that the police do not engage in high speed pursuits, in order to eliminate deaths on our roads.
A few kilometres down the road the offenders crash the stolen car into your daughter's car, killing her and your grandson instantly.
What would your thoughts be?
Had the police engaged in a pursuit and apprehended the offenders when they had the opportunity, the lives of your daughter and grandson would have been saved.
It's a two way street, Rusty and not as clear cut as you seem to think.

One case I know very well (too well) is that of a husband/father who abducted his own children from his estranged wife and fears were held for the children's safety as he had previously voiced intentions to make sure his ex-wife couldn't have them.
A L.O.T.B.K.F. was issued and police on patrol spotted the car, with offender and kids on board.
A pursuit was commenced but the driver of the pursuit car aborted it shortly after, citing risks of injury to the children as the reason.
You can probably guess the rest.
The car was later found with the bodies of two murdered children and one suicide victim.
Don't you suppose that that police officer will ask himself this question every day for the rest of his life - "Why didn't I keep pursuing until I apprehended him? Those children would still be alive today."
It's a tough one, especially when you're the one actually doing it and not just watching and criticising from the sidelines.

In today's society, my belief is pursuits are a necessary evil, albeit with stringent guidelines for police to follow.

[Dazzler]

They are some strong arguments in favour of your view Dave 

[Hati]

Rusty just needs to open his other eye (or is it one all up?? ) to see that there is an other side to the coin. Like mentioned above, it's too easy to sit on the sideline, spectate and start throwing stones based on partial information... So bloody sick of it 

[Asterix]

Worth a read:

Rusty, I agree there's some valid questions raised in that article, but I'm still convinced that not chasing these butheads will have far worse consequences.

I don't like the idea of letting the bad guys know they just have to do something dangerous enough, than the Police won't do anything about it.

[rustynutz]

It's a two way street, Rusty and not as clear cut as you seem to think.

I've never said it was clear cut....The police have a bugger of a job and I certainly wouldn't wanna be doing it. 

Rusty just needs to open his other eye (or is it one all up?? ) to see that there is an other side to the coin. Like mentioned above, it's too easy to sit on the sideline, spectate and start throwing stones based on partial information... So bloody sick of it 

Is it only one eyed if I have a different opinion to some? It would seem so.... 
I don't know what the answer is but killing people over some stolen goods seems pretty extreme to me.

[Hati]

Is it only one eyed if I have a different opinion to some? It would seem so.... 

No not at all, your opinion was duly noted the first time in this thread. My point is that a story is NEVER single sided. A wise person would consider that fact and tone down the opinion a bit. If you had already done that, I would hate to read what your initial opinion was. Case in point: reading your posts, my first thought was that rusty is cop bashing. Then I thought about your side of it and toned it right down to just not accepting the existence of the other side to this sad story.


Long story short, all I'm saying is that the truth is always somewhere in the middle...

I don't know what the answer is but killing people over some stolen goods seems pretty extreme to me.

This is simplified to the extreme, me thinks. No cop has ever engaged in  pursuit with the intent to help someone across to greener pastures... The world is unfortunately not black and white. Like Asterix pointed out a number of times, you can't just let the bad guys get away with it. At that rate car theft would escalate sky high because you won't get caught, because you won't be chased. Is this the solution? I don't think so.


For a long time now I was a big fan of the Singaporean way of dealing with crime. Make the bloody punishment the deterrent!!! If you know that stealing a car for example will attract a mandatory 10 year jail sentence, do you think anyone would ever steal one? I don't think so. The problem in most western countries is that the punishment is a knee jerk reaction, nothing to do with deterring the potential "candidate" to commit the crime in the first place. Change that around and suddenly our world would be a much safer place...


Meanwhile rusty, if you have a better solution to this problem, short of banning pursuits, please voice it. I'm sure many (maybe even powers to be) would be interested.

[Just Rick]

Personally I can't remember the last time I have heard of either a fire engine nor an ambulance cleaning someone up and killing them,but I have heard of at least four police vehicles,within Australia in the past two years.

That is probably because fire engines and ambulances don't have cause to chase offenders in stolen cars at high speed, Rick. They respond to incidents and do not chase offenders.

The offenders in this case had stolen someone's expensive Audi and had used it to commit numerous crimes on a crime spree right across the metropolitan area.

So maybe the police should just ignore them and let them do what they want. 

By apprehending these lowlifes, who knows how many other crimes and deaths will be prevented.

Same old argument from some, but the other way is to hand the streets over to the bad guys.

It is very easy to sit in your lounge chairs and criticize the police for what they did, but if these offenders went for three or four or five months without being caught, committing more and more crimes, as they do, then I wonder who would be screaming the loudest about the police not doing their job?

I bet I know.

Dave well aware of the issues you have pointed out(we were discussing it today),but I am only going on what was reported and seeing the vehicle this Office was using,I have no issue with Vehicle pursuits,it was not a pursuit vehicle and as reported the officer had not been pursuit trained(but as others have pointed out this information could be wrong)with the way technology isin this day and age,all I'm aguring isthere has to be a safer way thn chasing people in a ford territory,he may as well have been in a bongo van.

As others have said,this WAS an accident,also have pointed out this officer has to live with his actions,may they haunt him like some of my past actions haunt me and never leave him,harsh words you may say,but I can tell you,constant nightmares and visions of others faces help to make you stop and think.

[rustynutz]

No not at all, your opinion was duly noted the first time in this thread. My point is that a story is NEVER single sided. A wise person would consider that fact and tone down the opinion a bit. If you had already done that, I would hate to read what your initial opinion was. Case in point: reading your posts, my first thought was that rusty is cop bashing. Then I thought about your side of it and toned it right down to just not accepting the existence of the other side to this sad story.

With my original post I admit I was angry as it does seem to me that police often get off light when someone is killed.....
I still remember how disgusted I was over this: Cop acquitted of Woodend road death | Bendigo Advertiser

BTW, just because I don't believe innocent people should be getting killed over some relatively minor offences doesn't mean I believe these crims should get away scot free though. That's the trouble with people such as Dave, he's automatically assumed I think they should... There ARE other options to pursuits, google them and you'll see....here's one: