This one's going down

He was found guilty in a court of law. He acted against his training and he paid the price. All you lot backing this guy up should think on because if the police are allowed to act like this other innocents may die as a result.

If the driver had his blues and twos on chances are the starred out teenager would still be alive and the car theif that still got away would have still got away

[punky]

Originally Posted by zing

He was found guilty in a court of law. He acted against his training and he paid the price. All you lot backing this guy up should think on because if the police are allowed to act like this other innocents may die as a result.

If the driver had his blues and twos on chances are the starred out teenager would still be alive and the car theif that still got away would have still got away

And if my uncle had tits he'd be my auntie.

Would you say that every doctor who makes an honest mistake and loses a patient as a result should get life inside?

if its proven negligent then there are consequences

and if some fellas on here had balls they would be men

---------- Post added at 23:56 ---------- Previous post was at 23:51 ----------

Incidentally dude your uncle may have Gynecomastia hehehehehe

[punky]

Originally Posted by zing

if its proven negligent then there are consequences

If that logic was applied we would run out of doctors pretty sharpish.

No human is infallible, regardless of background or training.

Ignoring the fact many posters in this thread don't have to make split-second descisions under great pressure - If you make a mistake, you buy another motherboard. If I make a mistake, I delete a file and re-write it.

If doctors, paramedics, soldiers, fire and police make a mistake, people can die. Not bigger mistakes. Simple mistakes that have bigger consequences. That doesn't seem to be appreciated by a lot of people. To say they shouldn't be expected to make mistakes is just ludicrous.

He made a descision which he thought was in the best interests of his community and paid a high price for it. If that weren't hard enough there are far too many people baying for blood in this thread.

---------- Post added 25-12-2009 at 00:08 ---------- Previous post was 24-12-2009 at 23:59 ----------

BTW, let's have some perspective here.

He pursued a car which under the circumstances could have posed a serious risk to the public. In the course of the pursuit the girl was killed and he got 3 years.

In another thread we have an illegal immigrant who is disqualified from driving, mows down a young girl and then runs off leaving her trapped under his car wheels to die. He gets 4 months.

If people are looking for blood there are far more worthier causes here.

Im not baying for blood im just countering the arguements that are backing this guy up

This guy did make the wrong choice and yes he is paying the price but I am happy he was found guilty I agree with the sentence. Ive seen enough of the crappy cop shows on TV to know that public safety is more important than the capture of a car thief and as ive said loads of times if he followed proper protacol which he surely knew well enough then he wouldnt be in this mess and the girl wouldnt be dead


My edit for your edit

I seen that thread but ive chosen not to post my opinion as it sickens me that this country is such a crap hole to allow that.
Of course I also see it typical that a immigrant is treated better than someone from this country however thats not the topic here

[punky]

Originally Posted by zing

Im not baying for blood im just countering the arguements that are backing this guy up

This guy did make the wrong choice and yes he is paying the price but I am happy he was found guilty I agree with the sentence. Ive seen enough of the crappy cop shows on TV to know that public safety is more important than the capture of a car thief and as ive said loads of times if he followed proper protacol which he surely knew well enough then he wouldnt be in this mess and the girl wouldnt be dead

I'm sure if you asked him before and after the incident he would have said his freedom, job, pension was more important than protecting the public from a possible stolen car. Unfortunately coppers don't have the luxury to sit back and refuse to make descisions that can have life or death consequences. We need those people and its ridiculous that people (normally that aren't in the same situation and can never appreciate what it means) want to hang them out to dry for being human.

BTW, I'm not aiming this at you dude. There are a lot of people in this thread (more vocal than you).

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by Tuftus

For the love of god...

He was travelling that speed to catch up with what he thought at the time was a stolen car. He may have known that road very well and thought the speed he was doing was within his limits to catch up with the *potential* criminal.

Unfortunately for him a ****ed up schoolgirl decided at the same time to cross the road.

Why don't you just come out and say what you mean, that cops should not chase crims, because as far as i have seen you have evaded most of Dereks questions?

Otherwise feel free to go around in circles.

So you think it is a good thing that a 16 year girl got killed for crossing the road because a policeman did not follow protocol and warn his commander or any pedestrians of his approach, she was obviously totally unaware or she would not have started to cross the road if forewarned.

He was jailed because he outright failed to do his job and all because he wanted to feel the drivers collar.

I have answered the questions but you seem to be of the opinion that we are in a police state and whatever the police do is fine by you.

And you are also saying that if she was drunk that she brought this all on her self, no being drunk is not a good enough reason for a supposedly highly trained police driver to career around on standard roads at high speed and kill her because he failed to do his job properly.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Moldova

I have answered the questions but you seem to be of the opinion that we are in a police state and whatever the police do is fine by you.

That's not what a police state is btw. it's a little off topic but this country is already heading for one without bringing the actual police into it

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Tuftus

For the love of god...

He was travelling that speed to catch up with what he thought at the time was a stolen car. He may have known that road very well and thought the speed he was doing was within his limits to catch up with the *potential* criminal.

The car was not stolen and was not flagged as such. He was chasing, what he thought to be, an outstanding warrant. His speed was excessive for the road and its conditions. To be driving at speeds close to one hundred miles per hour into a blind bend and ridge, was reckless at best. He should have slowed down until he had established there was no risk to other road users.

Unfortunately for him a ****ed up schoolgirl decided at the same time to cross the road.

What has this child's stratus have to do with what he did? Surely you can;'r be suggesting that because she had been drinking the evening before, she is somehow to blame? There is no proof, that I am aware of, that she was drunk.

Why don't you just come out and say what you mean, that cops should not chase crims, because as far as i have seen you have evaded most of Dereks questions?

Otherwise feel free to go around in circles.

No one is suggesting that police should not chase criminals (except for you, by putting words into people's mouths), we are saying is that they should conduct pursuits according to the published guidelines.

Talking of guidelines and avoiding questions, it seems as though Derek has been a little quiet in those.

---------- Post added at 21:46 ---------- Previous post was at 21:41 ----------

Originally Posted by punky

And if my uncle had tits he'd be my auntie.

Would you say that every doctor who makes an honest mistake and loses a patient as a result should get life inside?

But this was not just a "mistake." This was recklessness. If a doctor was reckless with someones life, I would expect them to be punished according to the law. If a doctor recklessly injected a patient with a deadly drug, or too much of a prescribed medicine, then he would potentially face prison.

---------- Post added at 21:48 ---------- Previous post was at 21:46 ----------

Originally Posted by punky

If that logic was applied we would run out of doctors pretty sharpish.

No human is infallible, regardless of background or training.

Ignoring the fact many posters in this thread don't have to make split-second descisions under great pressure - If you make a mistake, you buy another motherboard. If I make a mistake, I delete a file and re-write it.

If doctors, paramedics, soldiers, fire and police make a mistake, people can die. Not bigger mistakes. Simple mistakes that have bigger consequences. That doesn't seem to be appreciated by a lot of people. To say they shouldn't be expected to make mistakes is just ludicrous.

He made a descision which he thought was in the best interests of his community and paid a high price for it. If that weren't hard enough there are far too many people baying for blood in this thread.

---------- Post added 25-12-2009 at 00:08 ---------- Previous post was 24-12-2009 at 23:59 ----------

BTW, let's have some perspective here.

He pursued a car which under the circumstances could have posed a serious risk to the public. In the course of the pursuit the girl was killed and he got 3 years.

In another thread we have an illegal immigrant who is disqualified from driving, mows down a young girl and then runs off leaving her trapped under his car wheels to die. He gets 4 months.

If people are looking for blood there are far more worthier causes here.

These two cases are unconnected and are totally separate. You cannot say that because one got a lighter sentence the other should. Otherwise the prisons would be empty and the streets full of criminals.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

---------- Post added at 21:48 ---------- Previous post was at 21:46 ----------



These two cases are unconnected and are totally separate. You cannot say that because one got a lighter sentence the other should. Otherwise the prisons would be empty and the streets full of criminals.

surely though you have to agree that a comparison must be made between the two cases and the ridiculous sentance handed down to the immmigrant driver
if these guidlines and protocols you speak so highly of are to be so ridgidly adhered to then what chance have the police got if they can't chase criminals ?under your logic there would be no pursiuts at all

[Flyboy]

How do you work that out then? What logic are you referring to?

Originally Posted by Flyboy

How do you work that out then? What logic are you referring to?

your logic ,you refuse to accept that a balance must be achieved between catching criminals and public safety .now i agree that public safety is the most important ,i don't deny that ,but sometimes a officer has to make a descision wether or not to chase a criminal he weighs up the risk to the public and makes that descision . in this case the officer felt that because the road and the path were deserted it was acceptible to chase the supposed criminal at speed for the short period it would take to catch him up ,under your logic that chase would never happen because the risk is too great

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by martyh

your logic ,you refuse to accept that a balance must be achieved between catching criminals and public safety .now i agree that public safety is the most important ,i don't deny that ,but sometimes a officer has to make a descision wether or not to chase a criminal he weighs up the risk to the public and makes that descision . in this case the officer felt that because the road and the path were deserted it was acceptible to chase the supposed criminal at speed for the short period it would take to catch him up ,under your logic that chase would never happen because the risk is too great

So now he has psychic powers and knew that the road was deserted but when he turned that bend he realised that his ability had failed him and mowed down the pedestrian.

Originally Posted by Moldova

So now he has psychic powers and knew that the road was deserted but when he turned that bend he realised that his ability had failed him and mowed down the pedestrian.

well concidering he had just drove down the road turned round then drove back i think he was in a good position to see that the road was deserted

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by martyh

your logic ,you refuse to accept that a balance must be achieved between catching criminals and public safety .now i agree that public safety is the most important ,i don't deny that ,but sometimes a officer has to make a descision wether or not to chase a criminal he weighs up the risk to the public and makes that descision . in this case the officer felt that because the road and the path were deserted it was acceptible to chase the supposed criminal at speed for the short period it would take to catch him up ,under your logic that chase would never happen because the risk is too great

So...you got all of that from, me asking that police officers follow their training and guidelines to saying that I suggest that the police don't chase criminals? Wow, that really is some jump in logic, isn't it?

The road and path was not deserted though, was it? They were occupied by a sixteen year old child.