i30 Owners Club
OFF TOPIC => WORLD NEWS => Motoring => Topic started by: rustynutz on January 28, 2016, 03:06:25
-
BY MARK HINCHLIFFE
27 JAN, 2016
:link: Dashcam Video Shows Oregon Cop Kicking Motorcyclist - YouTube (https://youtu.be/7Uuo_CiiPk8)
An American rider who was rammed by an unmarked police car after a five-minute pursuit and then kicked in the chest has successfully sued the officer for $181,170 in damages.
Aprilia rider Justin Wilkens filed a complaint against Oregon State Trooper Lieutenant Rob Edwards for excessive force, but it was dismissed by the district attorney’s office and the officer has since been promoted to captain.
So Justin decided to sue for damages after paying $31,000 in medical bills from a broken clavicle and fractured rib.
It all started in August 2012 when the officer, driving an unmarked black Camaro patrol car, saw Justin speeding and overtaking cars across double lines.
He began pursuing Justin with the red and blue lights flashing, but no siren. Justin says he didn’t know he was being pursued because he couldn’t hear anything and couldn’t identify the car because of the blur in his mirrors.
Even when he did realise he was being pursued by police, he said he was unsure because he had never seen a black Camaro used as a police pursuit vehicle.
As seen in the video, Justin pulls over for the police at the lights and is then rammed by the Camaro and knocked off his bike.
The officer claims that ramming the bike was an accident caused by brake fade.
Edwards then jumps out of the car with his gun pulled and yells at Justin to get down on the ground.
As Justin starts to comply and bends over, the officer kicks him in the chest and forces him to the ground.
A jury of eight have now awarded Justin $31,000 for his medical expenses and bike repairs, $100,000 for his pain and suffering and $50,000 in punitive damages.
The officer, who was reprimanded for “neglecting to report his use of force against Wilkens”, will be forced to pay the full $181,170 to Justin.
Source: :link: Cop sued for ramming and kicking rider - Motorbike Writer (http://motorbikewriter.com/cop-sued-ramming-kicking-rider/)
-
Fairy Nuff too, if there was nothing we haven't been told leading up to the event.
I'd have to agree with that decision on the basis of the information available.
-
Watching that video I reckon you could see when he fully realised it was a cop behind him....You see him move his head to the left at 3.30 and then comes the up & down head movement and you could almost hear him saying "fff*ck!!!" :lol:
-
Yes, either that or that is when he gave up following a chase.
As I said, on the facts presented, fair enough.
Sometimes though only the incriminating part of the video is shown to support their version.
-
It didn't even look like a "chase", it looked like the rider was just out having a bit of a fang... :undecided:
Sometimes though only the incriminating part of the video is shown to support their version.
Whose version???
It looked to me the video incriminated both parties... :undecided:
-
I think that both parties incriminate themselves, the issue I have is with the quality of "reporting" by the author.
According to the reporter Justin did not realise he was being pursued as he had never seen a Black Camaro used as a patrol vehicle. Well no sh1t Sherlock, that is the whole point, in the UK we have such a variety of unmarked vehicles of all makes and models, it isn't until the lights behind the grille come on that you notice it is plod.
He continues to ride for some distance, oblivious to what is happening behind him, the police car is visible enough to the two other motorists who pull over immediately to let the patrol car through. In the UK that could be a chargeable offence of driving without due care and attention.
Justin "pulls over at the lights". Does he? I didn't see any real evidence that he was stopping for the patrol vehicle, he looked ready to check the road was clear and continue on his merry way.
Justin "was about to comply with the officers instructions" to get on the deck - no he wasn't, he was giving it gesticulation and argument.
If that was as fast as the officer could make his Camaro go in a "pursuit situation", he either needs better training or his Camaro needs a service.
In the UK that would not have been classed as "ramming", it would have been a safe stoppage method for an officer to use if there was no risk to the general public and they felt that it was a reasonable method to end the pursuit. For the officer to claim it was "brake fade" is I think either misspelt or misheard, what he actually said was "brain fade".
The force used was over the top, he should at least have kept at arms length and given the rider time to remove his helmet which would have given the officer a better chance of observing the potential actions of his "catch".
I also take issue with "the officer neglecting to report his use of force" in the report. The camera is in his car, by having the footage surely that is by default "reporting"?
-
I have just noticed that since the original posting, the video has been changed.
The original post only showed the very end so I'll now take a closer look. ;)
-
Yes, well that puts a different perspective on things, doesn't it?!!!
Which is exactly why I said in my original post that it is dependent on what happened before.
There is usually a "before" story and that video shows it.
Total disregard for the road rules or others' safety by the motorcyclist.
Having now viewed the whole video, it is exactly why it is always dangerous to base decisions on just a small "snapshot" of the full facts.
I must have viewed the video shortly after posting when it only showed the end of the incident.
-
I have just noticed that since the original posting, the video has been changed.
The original post only showed the very end so I'll now take a closer look. ;)
I dunno what you were watching, Dave but the video is still exactly the same as what I posted... :crazy1:
-
He continues to ride for some distance, oblivious to what is happening behind him, the police car is visible enough to the two other motorists who pull over immediately to let the patrol car through.
Have you ever ridden a sports bike, Brian? From my experience rear visibility is usually pretty poor, with rear mirrors giving a great view of your arms/body and not a lot more...
Justin "pulls over at the lights". Does he? I didn't see any real evidence that he was stopping for the patrol vehicle, he looked ready to check the road was clear and continue on his merry way.
Really? He pulled over to the far right and was proceeding to put both feet down well short of the intersection stop line when he was shunted...
Justin "was about to comply with the officers instructions" to get on the deck - no he wasn't, he was giving it gesticulation and argument.
Geez, Brian, I suggest you watch the video again...even I can see he was in the process of getting down when he was attacked... :eek:
Total disregard for the road rules or others' safety by the motorcyclist.
Dave, which part of it was affecting anyone else's safety? :undecided:
From what I saw he didn't endanger any other road user...He only overtook when there were no oncoming cars approaching... :undecided:
-
Federal jury rules in favor of speeding motorcyclist, against Oregon State Police trooper
Jurors find that trooper used excessive force in kicking the motorist during arrest
By Jack Moran
The Register-Guard
JAN. 15, 2016
A federal jury on Thursday ruled that Oregon State Police Capt. Rob Edwards violated a Eugene man’s civil rights by kicking him in the upper chest after chasing down his speeding motorcycle on Crow Road.
The eight-member jury heard evidence in a trial in U.S. District Court in Eugene earlier this week, and spent about four hours Thursday deliberating before returning a verdict that supports Justin Wilkens’ excessive-force claim in regard to the kick.
Wilkens was awarded more than $180,000 in total damages.
Jurors additionally determined that Edwards acted with negligence when his police car rear-ended Wilkens’ motorcycle, but ruled that the veteran state trooper did not violate Wilkens’ rights by pointing a gun at him and using force to handcuff and then pull Wilkens to his feet.
Wilkens suffered a broken left clavicle, a fractured rib and other injuries in the Aug. 3, 2012, incident.
“I’m just happy as heck,” Wilkens, 41, said as he left the courthouse moments after U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Coffin read the verdict.
Edwards declined comment, and one of his lawyers — state Assistant Attorney General Dirk Pierson — said he was not authorized to speak on the case.
State police, in a statement released Thursday night, said the agency “is disappointed with the (trial) outcome and feels the actions of our troopers clearly did not violate established procedures or tactics. In situations like these, officers have milliseconds to make what may be life-or-death decisions and those officers should be shielded from the liability of civil damages.”
State Department of Justice spokeswoman Kristina Edmunson, meanwhile, did not directly respond to a question regarding a potential appeal but said Thursday in a statement that officials in her office “respect today’s decision, and we are assessing our next steps.”
The jury awarded Wilkens more than $31,000 in economic damages to reimburse his medical expenses and motorcycle repair bills; $100,000 in noneconomic damages for his injuries, pain and suffering; and $50,000 in punitive damages.
Wilkens’ attorney, Lauren Regan of Eugene, said the award of punitive damages signals that the jury felt Edwards used “malice” in dealing with Wilkens.
“It’s a message from the community,” she said.
Punitive damages are intended to discourage a defendant and others in similar positions from engaging in conduct that has prompted a lawsuit.
Regan, executive director of the Civil Liberties Defense Center in Eugene, said police agencies typically pay damages in cases where individual officers are found to have used excessive force against citizens.
The key piece of evidence in Wilkens’ case was a recording of the incident captured by an in-car video system in Edwards’ unmarked police vehicle. According to trial testimony, Edwards did not know the unmarked Chevrolet Camaro he was driving at the time was equipped with the video system.
The video, which Regan released to The Register-Guard Thursday after the verdict, was played a number of times for the jury during the three-day trial. It shows Wilkens’ motorcycle speeding past Edwards’ unmarked car, and then passing two other vehicles in no-passing zones on Crow Road. Edwards gave chase but Wilkens did not immediately stop. The motorcyclist finally pulled over when he reached the intersection of Crow Road and Highway 126 just west of Eugene.
Almost immediately after Wilkens stopped, the Camaro rear-ended his motorcycle while traveling at a low speed. Wilkens fell, then got up and saw Edwards pointing a gun at him.
Edwards then kicked Wilkens in the upper chest as the motorcyclist slowly complied with commands to get onto the ground.
Edwards testified at trial that his actions were consistent with state police policy and training. State police investigated the incident and determined that the force used by Edwards was justified, and the Lane County District Attorney’s Office validated that ruling, District Attorney Patty Perlow told The Register-Guard on Thursday.
Edwards acknowledged in his testimony that Wilkens had begun to comply with his commands when he landed the kick, but said he was unable to stop the kick because he “already had the muscles fired” in his right leg.
Edwards also said he accidentally “bumped” the back end of Wilkens’ motorcycle as a result of possible “brake fade” — a term used to describe the loss of braking power because of overheating. But Regan reminded jurors in a closing argument that a brake expert testified at trial that brake fade rarely occurs in modern brake systems.
Edwards — who, according to trial testimony, received a written reprimand for neglecting to report his use of force against Wilkens to his direct supervisor in a telephone conversation shortly after the incident — testified that he was “frustrated” but not angry with Wilkens after chasing down the motorcyclist. He said he believed Wilkens was trying to elude him at speeds that exceeded 100 mph.
Perlow said Thursday that a prosecutor in her office reviewed the incident and declined to file an eluding charge against Wilkens because the prosecutor felt the allegation could not have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Perlow said she does not know why Wilkens was not charged with reckless driving or any traffic violations, saying “it was clearly an oversight on our part.”
Wilkens testified that he did not recognize Edwards’ unmarked car as a police vehicle when he passed it, and that he didn’t know Edwards was pursuing him until he neared the intersection and stopped.
Wilkens said his tight-fitting motorcycle helmet impaired his ability to hear at the time, and that he did not see the Camaro’s flashing blue-and-red lights — which are embedded in the car’s grille — through a small, rear-view mirror. He testified that when he pulled over for Edwards, he expected to receive a “deserved” speeding ticket.
Edwards, 46, held the rank of lieutenant and served as supervisor of OSP’s Springfield office at the time of the incident. He was later promoted to captain and transferred in early 2015 to OSP’s headquarters in Bend. Edwards has been a state trooper for 22 years.
Source: http://registerguard.com/rg/news/local/33955359-75/federal-jury-rules-in-favor-of-speeding-motorcyclist-against-oregon-state-police-trooper.html.csp (http://registerguard.com/rg/news/local/33955359-75/federal-jury-rules-in-favor-of-speeding-motorcyclist-against-oregon-state-police-trooper.html.csp)
-
The cop may have been in the wrong but the damages claim is a complete farce, you can see the kick barely touches him as the rider was already moving backwards since he seen it coming so I'd doubt that could fracture a rib and it was no where near his clavicle :crazy1:
-
I think the cop showed considerable restraint.... This is after all America where the idiot bike rider is more than likely to pull a gun...
As has been said the numpty on the bike knew quite well what he was doing, and got off light in my opinion :Shocked: :Shocked: :Shocked:
-
He continues to ride for some distance, oblivious to what is happening behind him, the police car is visible enough to the two other motorists who pull over immediately to let the patrol car through.
Have you ever ridden a sports bike, Brian? From my experience rear visibility is usually pretty poor, with rear mirrors giving a great view of your arms/body and not a lot more...
No, but since you are a previous proponent of the shoulder check for car drivers, I would suggest that the same applies to bike riders, as such given the rider overtook two vehicles without performing a shoulder check which would have alerted him to the pursuing police vehicle I would suggest that is more evidence to support riding without due care and attention. Given that he apparently "knew" it was a black Camaro which is not normally a police vehicle suggests he knew it was there and in pursuit of (something)
Justin "pulls over at the lights". Does he? I didn't see any real evidence that he was stopping for the patrol vehicle, he looked ready to check the road was clear and continue on his merry way.
Really? He pulled over to the far right and was proceeding to put both feet down well short of the intersection stop line when he was shunted... [/quote]
Disagree, he had plenty of opportunity to pull over prior to the intersection, for instance at 3:27 he could have pulled in behind or in front of the white parked vehicle on the shoulder and not caused an obstruction. When the car hits him, he is still moving forward towards the intersection line with no apparent signal to suggest he is actually going to pull over.
Justin "was about to comply with the officers instructions" to get on the deck - no he wasn't, he was giving it gesticulation and argument.
Geez, Brian, I suggest you watch the video again...even I can see he was in the process of getting down when he was attacked... :eek: [/quote]
At 3:47 he does indeed start to bend forward, however there is no evidence to suggest that was obeying the command of the officer having given the gesticulations and one can assume chat or to simply pick his ride back up. Nobody except for the two people involved know from this footage which scenario is correct, I was simply giving an interpretation of the video.
Total disregard for the road rules or others' safety by the motorcyclist.
Dave, which part of it was affecting anyone else's safety? :undecided:
From what I saw he didn't endanger any other road user...He only overtook when there were no oncoming cars approaching... :undecided:
[/quote]
Whilst the overtakes may have looked safe, they were still in blatant disregard for the law, which states not to cross a solid middle line, I therefore agree with Dave's statement.
Don't take it personally Russ, you have your interpretation, others have a variation, the courts have decided the outcome based on their interpretation and that is that. I stand by my opinion of the original reporter, a very poorly composed piece, which could easily have been written from the bias of a supporter of the bike rider.
-
Some people will see what they want to see... :undecided:
*Fact: the jury found the cop used excessive force...
*Fact: that cop could have killed that rider with his actions but it seems that that is okay for many of you out there because the rider committed such heinous crimes... :head_butt:
The cop may have been in the wrong but the damages claim is a complete farce, you can see the kick barely touches him as the rider was already moving backwards since he seen it coming so I'd doubt that could fracture a rib and it was no where near his clavicle :crazy1:
You're forgetting he had just taken a spill, perhaps some of the damage occurred then???
-
You're forgetting he had just taken a spill, perhaps some of the damage occurred then???
Possibly, but even that didn't look to severe :undecided:
-
It was clear to me that the biker was riding carelessly by crossing the white line on several occasions.
My guess is that the biker was not aware of being pursued - but in the cops mind he thought the biker was trying to make a run for it and taking overtaking risks in an attempt to escape.
So the cop sits there with his foot on the throttle getting more and more riled up until suddenly he is presented with the biker almost stationary and perhaps about to shoot off again at the turning. So the red mist kicked in and he knocked the guy off his bike to prevent his escape then followed up with gratuitous and unnecessary violence.
How his seniors claimed he was not using excessive force says much about how the cops stick together - but so do most groups with a common purpose. It's human nature.
In my book the cop was guilty of excessive violence
The biker was guilty of dangerous driving
The jury was guilty of an outlandish award
I fail to find anyone innocent in that story.
Only in the USA................. :evil:
-
It was clear to me that the biker was riding carelessly by crossing the white line on several occasions.
My guess is that the biker was not aware of being pursued - but in the cops mind he thought the biker was trying to make a run for it and taking overtaking risks in an attempt to escape.
So the cop sits there with his foot on the throttle getting more and more riled up until suddenly he is presented with the biker almost stationary and perhaps about to shoot off again at the turning. So the red mist kicked in and he knocked the guy off his bike to prevent his escape then followed up with gratuitous and unnecessary violence.
How his seniors claimed he was not using excessive force says much about how the cops stick together - but so do most groups with a common purpose. It's human nature.
In my book the cop was guilty of excessive violence
The biker was guilty of dangerous driving
The jury was guilty of an outlandish award
I fail to find anyone innocent in that story.
Only in the USA................. :evil:
My thoughts exactly, Alan.
-
Some people will see what they want to see... :undecided:
*Fact: the jury found the cop used excessive force...
*Fact: that cop could have killed that rider with his actions but it seems that that is okay for many of you out there because the rider committed such heinous crimes... :head_butt:
The cop may have been in the wrong but the damages claim is a complete farce, you can see the kick barely touches him as the rider was already moving backwards since he seen it coming so I'd doubt that could fracture a rib and it was no where near his clavicle :crazy1:
You're forgetting he had just taken a spill, perhaps some of the damage occurred then???
Fact - You have ignored my statement about not taking it personally.
Fact - You have ignored my statement about shoulder checks, so yeah, some folks will only see what they want to see, including yourself.
Fact - according to your second report about this, the trooper exercised what he is trained to do.
Fact - The PD may still appeal the finding.
Fact - This is the third time this has been in court, the previous twice the case was dismissed. Usual lets keep going until we get the answer we want, one of the reasons the world is in the shitty state it is.
Fact - There are bigger spills all over YouTube where the rider gets up and walks away, sometimes they even end up surfing on car roofs.
Lighten up a bit, we all know the reason this post exists!
First world problems.....
-
Lighten up a bit, we all know the reason this post exists!
And we all know why you choose to respond... :rolleyes:
-
I have responded with a set of observations and opinions backed up by what I have seen, provided by what you chose to post.
There are others in the same thread who have done the same thing.
That is the point of a forum.
If you don't want your one man crusade to prove that the worlds police forces are all corrupt liars who lie in the same bed as the politicians to be commented upon in any other manner than to agree with your opinion then I suggest they do not belong in an open forum.
-
Yawn! :rolleyes:
No one man crusade on my part, Brian...can you say the same? :wink:
With this thread I've simply shown how sometimes Police will abuse their position when they think no-one is watching...
I've never said the rider wasn't a dickhead for speeding and crossing double lines, he deserved to be fined....What he didn't deserve though was to be shunted off his motorcycle and assaulted.
I really find it disturbing that normally compassionate & caring people will, for whatever reason find that sort of behaviour acceptable.... :Shocked:
-
Here we go again
-
Of course Russ, how remiss of me.
You are of course correct. Have a good day.
-
With this thread I've simply shown how sometimes Police will abuse their position when they think no-one is watching...
When no one is watching????
Do you really think that the police officer was not aware that the car he was driving was equipped with a camera? :undecided:
That motorcycle rider not only endangered his own life, but also that of the police officer whose duty it was to pursue him and also any other road user who might have pulled into the road that the motorcyclist was travelling on or any motorist who might have panicked due to his (obvious) excessive speed as he overtook them.
If that police officer was injured or killed whilst pursuing that irresponsible motorcyclist, maybe he might have not gone home to his family.
I do not not understand why you continually target police. :undecided:
What about the motorists (including motorcyclists) who abuse their privileges (not rights), privileges to ride a motorbike on public roads?
I do find it odd that you always target the authorities and not the original and obvious offenders.
If the motorcyclist had not so blatantly flouted the law, the whole incident would not have happened!
I'm sorry Rusty, but you really do seem to have a problem with the police for some reason.
As for me, I support the police.
Sure, from time to time some police do make mistakes and I have no issue with those officers paying the penalty for their mistakes.
But ultimately, the police are there to protect us all and they are not the enemy.
This motorcyclist was a moron who had no regard for anyone else.
-
No Dave, you are wrong too....
Leave it, we have been here too many times.
-
Well, im with Dave too, so I guess that makes 3 of us wrong.
I guess if Rusty posted as many links praising the police, road safety authorities and motorists (over motor cyclists, I might find it easier to believe he doesn't have a "down" on them.
-
When no one is watching????
Do you really think that the police officer was not aware that the car he was driving was equipped with a camera? :undecided:
Well, if you'd read that second article I posted you'd see that the copper admitted he didn't know...
According to trial testimony, Edwards did not know the unmarked Chevrolet Camaro he was driving at the time was equipped with the video system.
Once again it's turned into an attack on me...surprise surprise.... :rolleyes:
For your info, Dave ...I don't have an issue with Police if they do the right thing...but I do have an issue when they don't...
-
For your info, Dave ...I don't have an issue with Police if they do the right thing...but I do have an issue when they don't...
Pretty much the same with me and motorcyclists, Rusty. ;)
-
My turn :D
You can't do shoulder checks while riding a sportsbike, especially at speed, the riding position and gear make it virtually impossible and sport bike mirrors are awful, you will fall off if you try.
Nobody mentioned how bad the cops driving was.. He crossed double lines onto the other side of the road during the chase which made me go wtf..
I didn't see the biker do anything that deserved him being rammed and then kicked, that cop was out of control. Yes, they are only human, but to do that job they need to be able to control themselves. Cars are not to be used as weapons (brake fade my ass)
I like the police, I help them anytime I can, but that cop was out of line.
Doggie, I ride bikes and drive Semi's .. I must be a really bad person lol :crazy1:
-
Question.....
Why can't I purchase a sportscar which is so cocooned I can't see out of via the recommended shoulder check method or without rearview mirrors which work?
It seems to be crazy that part of the practical driving test for cars which you can be failed on is failing to observe your complete surroundings including behind yourself, yet with a motorcycle licence you can buy and ride a deathtrap badged as Sportsbike which only allows you to see through 180 degrees to the front and sides and not give a toss about the carnage you are leaving behind you.
How can that possibly be deemed safe?
-
I just checked with the head honcho of our local Hells Angel chapter and he tod me it's bollocks - they spend half their time looking over their shoulders when on a rumble and none of them have fell off their bikes while doing it yet.
-
I just checked with the head honcho of our local Hells Angel chapter and he tod me it's bollocks - they spend half their time looking over their shoulders when on a rumble and none of them have fell off their bikes while doing it yet.
Good one Alan, that can count as one of your jokes of the day....
-
Alan.. harleys are not sportsbikes.. actually they're more like a local farm implement that a motorcycle lol
Bumpkin, you can't see out of all sportscars either. I sat in the veloster and said this is awful, I can't see anything. Your bias is showing here dude..
How many people do head check? Seriously? Hardly anybody does it anyway, they're too busy texting on their phones in a 100kmh zone.. I do, but most people don't.
-
But at least in a Veloster you have three rear view mirrors which can surely be adjusted to give greater than 180 degree vision. At least you could in the one I sat in.
The point stands - if you can fail the driving test for failing to use your rear view mirrors enough times (suggesting that means you can surely see something in them) then why can you buy a bike adorned with mirrors which don't work? It's laughable.
Edit - I also shoulder check (I don't need to head check, I know it is there by the very fact I can see it in my non vibrating rearview mirror), you also fail the UK driving test for failing to perform shoulder checks.
Edit 2 - ttc, you might want to stop texting at 100k's, it's illegal and can cause accidents. :P :wink:
-
Alan.. harleys are not sportsbikes.. actually they're more like a local farm implement that a motorcycle lol
We are in a depression in the UK - and our poor Hells Angels are trading in their heavy, expensive and thirsty Harleys and moving onto proper bikes - made in Britain Triumphs - which they and their bitches find more comfortable and quiet enough for them to be able shout obscenities to each other.
You read it here first......... :whistler:
-
@ttc
I have my truck and motorbike licences too, so maybe I am too. :twisted:
The police are allowed (and supposed) to break traffic rules (like speeding and crossing double lines) when pursuing offenders.
It would be a bit hard to pursue the law breakers if they couldn't!!!
-
Here we go again
Yep...
Don't you just love the coppers excuse? Muscle memory, I must remember that one if I ever get pulled over for speeding...lol. "Hey officer, I've been doing a lot of physio on my right ankle lately so it must have been "muscle memory" that made me floor the excelerator...." :rofl: :crazy1:
Warning! Video contains some colourful language...
:link: RAW DASH CAM VIDEO: Eden Prairie officer accidentally shoots fleeing motorcyclist - YouTube (https://youtu.be/wuWVR2Dv5vM)
A Minnesota rider pulled over for speeding has been accidentally shot in the arm by a Minnesota police officer who blamed stress for the incident.
The Eden Prairie cop blames the mistake on the “high stress” of the situation and “muscle memory” from training 20 days before the shooting.
21-year-old motorcyclist Matthew Hovland-Knase was convicted of fleeing a peace officer in a motor vehicle at speeds over 100mph (160km/h). He was sentenced to five days of community service and 15 days house arrest.
Meanwhile, Sgt. Lonnie Soppeland was placed on administrative leave during an investigation. No further disciplinary action was taken as a result and he has since returned to active duty.
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/rustynutz69/LAPoliceChiefWilliamBrattonHoldsNewss9ZZvX5Uc7_l_zpshopstqhn.jpg~original)
-
And for those who think I don't post enough links praising the police... :victory:
:link: Unified police officer caught doing good deed - Story | Utah (http://www.good4utah.com/news/local-utah-state-news-/unified-police-officer-caught-doing-good-deed)
-
The Yanks do it their way. I remember back in the early 80's when on Highway Patrol, Sydney South, took a California Highway Patrol bloke out for half a day in the 351 Falcon. He was on holidays and ranq hq re a ride.
He was most disappointed when he found out we did not jam cars off the road doing the 'Pittman manouver and alight with cocked revolvers a la California. He also could not believe we dod not have a 'Goddam Shotgun' in our cars. :crazy1:
You have to understand half the drivers in the Land of the Free carry pistols , generally in their glove box, as is their right, to my distaste. Dare I say it if in an i30, it could be in the cool glovebox. :cool: No Uncle Lester that is a crap joke.
Hence the way US police carry out their duties. I don't normally get involved in debates re police activities, I would rather forget most of my 35 years, but now and again I cannot help myself.
-
Then why are you anti bike doggie?
The Aprilia in the clip has bar end mirrors fitted. I find it funny when people who've never ridden a sportsbike bag the riders. They don't know what you can see, what you can do, and sadly they'll never know how it feels. But these people pass judgement like they know everything. I don't have children, but I'd like to tell them they're doing it wrong because I know better than they do because I've seen it done.
The cop in this video drove dangerously, and was way over the top with his handling of someone who committed a traffic offence.
I've helped the local police put two different offenders in jail, I don't have anything against them, but that one I do.
-
Then why are you anti bike doggie?
I'm not.
Never have been and never will be.
I love motorbikes.
I own one.
I have many friends who ride bikes.
I buy motorcycle magazines regularly.
I used to ride police bikes.
So I'm not sure where you got your incorrect idea that I am anti-bike, ttc. :undecided:
I AM anti-bikie though. ;)
-
I didn't bag the rider, I initially stated that both were guilty of indiscretions and that I found the way it was reported slack.
I see none of the pro bikers have jumped up and down and actually answered my genuine query about useless mirrors and the ability to do a shoulder check. As a non-rider surely asking the question opened up the debate for it being answered and to educate me, I don't get it, I see the Moto GP and Superbike guys looking over the shoulders all the time at hugely elevated speeds to this, so why is it so difficult on a sportsbike?
-
It's not Brian. Absolutely not. :)
-
I didn't bag the rider, I initially stated that both were guilty of indiscretions and that I found the way it was reported slack.
I see none of the pro bikers have jumped up and down and actually answered my genuine query about useless mirrors and the ability to do a shoulder check. As a non-rider surely asking the question opened up the debate for it being answered and to educate me, I don't get it, I see the Moto GP and Superbike guys looking over the shoulders all the time at hugely elevated speeds to this, so why is it so difficult on a sportsbike?
Brian,I rode bikes for years,still go for a blat every now and then,if someone offers me their ride,I had several bikes over my riding life,some had excellent mirrors and some were freakin useless, giving very poor rear view vision, I always used an over the shoulder look before changing lanes(lot easier in a half face than a full face)I was and still am a big believer of lights on when on the road on a bike,I've only ever had to lay a bike down deliberately twice, both times was when I forgot to turn on my lights,