View Single Post
Old 22-12-2009, 20:44   #387
Peter_
Permanently Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: In a world of no buffering!!
Services: Samsung V+ XL TV XL Phone 30Mb Superhub Samsung Galaxy 3 32GB sd card In a world of no buffering!
Posts: 20,915
Peter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered stars
Peter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered starsPeter_ is seeing silvered stars
Re: This one's going down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek S View Post
Sadly they dropped the 100% perfect hindsight requirement a few years back.

At the time of the incident the officer involved thought the vehicle was stolen.

So for a third time.

Do you think the police should pursue drivers of stolen vehicles who may fail to stop?
Through a housing estate at speeds up 100MPH without any warning to potential pedestrians who may not be aware of the fast approaching vehicle I would say not in those circumstances as the is a chance an incident such as this may occur.

He had a radio and could have radioed for assistance gave the registration and just reversed direction and followed the driver out of the estate and then attempted to stop him which then would not have ended in a fatality.

---------- Post added at 21:44 ---------- Previous post was at 21:42 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh View Post
but modova the drivers innocence could not be verified until he had been stopped because the computer was out of date and the officer didn't know that so the officer was pursuing a stolen car
No reason to pursue at such a high speed through a residential area especially as he could have used his radio to call for assistance.
Peter_ is offline   Reply With Quote