Cop driving 109 mph w/o lights & siren hits a car. Guess who is charged?

[Broseph]

http://www.lvrj.com/news/45619762.html

To summarize, there was a Las Vegas PD cruiser blazing at 109 mph in a 45 mph zone. To give you an idea of how fast that is, you would cover a 100-yard football field in two seconds. The car did not have its lights on and did not have its sirens on. The car, after jamming on the brakes and slowing to 90 mph, smashed into the back of a pickup truck that was attempting to make a left turn. The officer was killed while the pickup truck driver wasn't.

Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie initially claimed that the cop car did have its lights and sirens on. Apparently, he had received this information from the first responders to the crash. They attempted to cover for their brothers in blue and lied that the car did have its lights and sirens on.

Calvin Darling, the driver of the pickup, was given a blood test at the hospital and had a BAC of .035. The officer's blood was not tested for alcohol levels.

After reviewing the evidence, Darling was charged with failing to yield to an emergency vehicle and DUI. The sheriff, however, said that after learning that the officer did not have his lights or sirens on, and was driving 109 mph, that the charges will change.

My commentary? Another ridiculous example of having a set of rules for the pawns, the ordinary citizens while having another set of rules for the only fraternity that doesn't have to worry about police harassment... the boys in blue themselves.

If I was driving 109 mph in a 45, and hit a cop car with an officer inside with a BAC of .035, (if I was still alive) I would be charged with attempted manslaughter, aggravated assault, wreckless driving, driving too fast for conditions, etc. There would be an endless # of charges.

Seriously, this guy should have all charges dropped against him, and the officers that lied to attempt to cover for their guys should get an obstruction of justice to let them know that having a badge doesn't make you immune to the law. Too bad, in today's society, the badge does give you the closest thing to immunity as you will get.

[CaptPops]

Why is it 109MPH. Why not 100, or 110, or 90 plus. If the truck did not have a radar in the back, it sounds like an agenda driven story.

[AutoRacer55]

Why is it 109MPH. Why not 100, or 110, or 90 plus. If the truck did not have a radar in the back, it sounds like an agenda driven story.

ECU or black box probably had that info in it.

[notluzn]

Seems they want someoene to pay for the bad Police Officers action.

[PredFan]

Agreed, all charges dropped.

you can't even charge him with DUI imo, because there is no evidence he was actually impaired, but that's another thread.

[AutoRacer55]

Agreed, all charges dropped.

you can't even charge him with DUI imo, because there is no evidence he was actually impaired, but that's another thread.

He's Legally drunk!

/georgecarlin

[GA_LP]

He's Legally drunk!

/georgecarlinNo he wasn't - he was .035 an hour after the accident, the legal limit in NV is .08. The standard is that you eliminate an average of .015 per hour, so even backtracking to the accident, he was approximately .05, well below the legal limit. And given the sheriff's deputies lack of truthfulness regarding the accident, I find it difficult to accept their description of his failing a field sobriety test.

[Finality]

The joke is "legally" drunk. That's how they say it, instead of "illegally" drunk. :)

[JenyEliza]

http://www.lvrj.com/news/45619762.html

To summarize, there was a Las Vegas PD cruiser blazing at 109 mph in a 45 mph zone. To give you an idea of how fast that is, you would cover a 100-yard football field in two seconds. The car did not have its lights on and did not have its sirens on. The car, after jamming on the brakes and slowing to 90 mph, smashed into the back of a pickup truck that was attempting to make a left turn. The officer was killed while the pickup truck driver wasn't.

Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie initially claimed that the cop car did have its lights and sirens on. Apparently, he had received this information from the first responders to the crash. They attempted to cover for their brothers in blue and lied that the car did have its lights and sirens on.

Calvin Darling, the driver of the pickup, was given a blood test at the hospital and had a BAC of .035. The officer's blood was not tested for alcohol levels.

After reviewing the evidence, Darling was charged with failing to yield to an emergency vehicle and DUI. The sheriff, however, said that after learning that the officer did not have his lights or sirens on, and was driving 109 mph, that the charges will change.

My commentary? Another ridiculous example of having a set of rules for the pawns, the ordinary citizens while having another set of rules for the only fraternity that doesn't have to worry about police harassment... the boys in blue themselves.

If I was driving 109 mph in a 45, and hit a cop car with an officer inside with a BAC of .035, (if I was still alive) I would be charged with attempted manslaughter, aggravated assault, wreckless driving, driving too fast for conditions, etc. There would be an endless # of charges.

Seriously, this guy should have all charges dropped against him, and the officers that lied to attempt to cover for their guys should get an obstruction of justice to let them know that having a badge doesn't make you immune to the law. Too bad, in today's society, the badge does give you the closest thing to immunity as you will get.

I agree completely! :clap:

This crap has been going on for years. A similar thing happened to my mother (only she was pregnant, and not drinking) back in 1961. Mom was driving my Dad's car (a Corvette they were selling due to the new baby) and a motorcycle cop t-boned Mom at a very high rate of speed. No lights. Not even a headlight (at dusk no less). No siren. Nothing.

Guess who was charged? Right. My Mom. No one in blue even gave a **** about the baby she was carrying. They were all boo-hoo over the ****ing cop who t-boned her for no damned reason other than he was driving fast to get someplace he wanted to get to quickly.

It took years and my parents fought it, hired lawyers and eventually they won. How? A newspaper reporter had taken pictures of the smash and you could clearly see the key was not in a position such that the lights would have been on. Without that photo, my totally innocent mother might have cooled her heels in jail for a very long time, leaving behind a husband and children with no matriarch to care for them.

This whole dual-rule system has GOT TO GO. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

Jeny

[JenyEliza]

No he wasn't - he was .035 an hour after the accident, the legal limit in NV is .08. The standard is that you eliminate an average of .015 per hour, so even backtracking to the accident, he was approximately .05, well below the legal limit. And given the sheriff's deputies lack of truthfulness regarding the accident, I find it difficult to accept their description of his failing a field sobriety test.

If this had happened here in Atlanta, I wouldn't believe the story at all, given our LEO's propensity for story-telling and making things up out of whole cloth. Like 98 year old women being major drug dealers out of their home and such.

Seriously, some of the boys in blue would be much better suited writing fiction along the lines of Stephen King, than "serving and protecting". (oh, gag me on that tag line).

Jeny

[roger teekell]

I live in Vegas..

And the REASON we have all the facts in this case is because the Sherrif did not fudge the facts of the case...

He presented them truthfully...

Just an FYI...

The person that SHOULD be hung out to dry in this situation is the 14 year old BRAT that called in the FALSE "Domestic Violence" report..

That little Trollop should be thrown in jail as long as the law will allow..

[CMike11]

The cop wasn't even wearing his safety belt.

[FidelisAdMortem]

I live in Vegas..

And the REASON we have all the facts in this case is because the Sherrif did not fudge the facts of the case...

He presented them truthfully...

Just an FYI...

The person that SHOULD be hung out to dry in this situation is the 14 year old BRAT that called in the FALSE "Domestic Violence" report..

That little Trollop should be thrown in jail as long as the law will allow..

Thank you for that response. Some people will either have to eat crow for their kneejerk reactions as always or spin it as usual.

[ImNewHere]

I live in Vegas..

And the REASON we have all the facts in this case is because the Sherrif did not fudge the facts of the case...

He presented them truthfully...

I live in Vegas too. We don't lose officers very often, but when we do it sucks. He was below the "legal limit" but no one can testify that just because you're below 0.08 that you're NOT impaired. Buzzed driving is drunk driving.

http://www.stopimpaireddriving.org/planners/Holiday2006/media/FactSheet_SN.pdf

Or for those of you who don't feel like reading. :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaFeRhjd3ZE

Karma has it's way of making things even. We lost a good cop with a promising future. If he stays in this town, things will work out.

Just an FYI...

The person that SHOULD be hung out to dry in this situation is the 14 year old BRAT that called in the FALSE "Domestic Violence" report..

That little Trollop should be thrown in jail as long as the law will allow..

Filed a false police report. I'm hoping that plays out well for the community as well, considering the loss to his family and our city.

[ImNewHere]

The cop wasn't even wearing his safety belt.

And his blood alcohol was........?

[notluzn]

And his blood alcohol was........?
It's manditory to were seat belts in Nevada and also a rule in Law enforcment that they buckle up.

[jimjames418]

I thought it was against the law for police officers to go above the speed limit without having their emergency lights on. And even then, unless they have the bad guy in sight they are limited to 10-15 mph above the speed limit. At least that is what my police officer daughter says.

[ImNewHere]

It's manditory to were seat belts in Nevada and also a rule in Law enforcment that they buckle up.

And I'm sure if he survived the crash with the impaired driver, he would need to answer for that.

[ImNewHere]

I thought it was against the law for police officers to go above the speed limit without having their emergency lights on. And even then, unless they have the bad guy in sight they are limited to 10-15 mph above the speed limit. At least that is what my police officer daughter says.

And I thought it was illegal to drive impaired by drugs or alcohol.

[CMike11]

And his blood alcohol was........?

The cop?

The civilian was well into the legal limit.

[jimjames418]

The cop?

The civilian was well into the legal limit.
I believe that all persons involved in accident should have their blood alcohol level checked.

[JenyEliza]

And I'm sure if he survived the crash with the impaired driver, he would need to answer for that.

Ok....from my understanding, the officer hit the imparied driver (who was impaired against the law) while speeding over and above the allowable limit (which is against law/leo rules), with no lights or siren (which is against law/leo rules) and wearing no seatbelt (again, against the law/leo rules).

It does not appear the impaired driver hit the cop. I could be wrong. However, that being the case, then I would say it's not the fault of the imapired driver that the cop is dead. Rather, the cop should have made different decisions/taken different actions to prevent this accident and his death. Namely, he could have followed the set standards for responding to *any* call. (ie, lights, siren, etc to warn the public of his approach so that other motorists can get out of his way). He also could have properly secured his person in the vehicle, per Nevada state law, which may or may not have actually saved his life.

I am not saying the impaired driver should not be held accountable for driving while impaired. By all means, he should be prosecuted for driving impaired. However, I don't see how this accident was his fault. What am I not understanding?

Please feel free to correct me where I am wrong.

[JenyEliza]

I believe that all persons involved in accident should have their blood alcohol level checked.

Agreed. This should also include all LEOs, Judges, lawyers, politicians, government employees and other persons who might have a means and motive to use a separate standard of conduct than the general motoring public while on public roads.

[notluzn]

Anyone that is impaired at .035 must be freaking 50lbs. I think there is an excuse for the Officers poor judgment and putting this person.

[notluzn]

BTW, out here at some clubs, police officers will kick back out side and offer people to blow to give a breath test so they don't drive drunk. Anything under .06 they tell the peeps to be safe and careful and anyone above is told not to drive and have a friend drive. They watch people get in the cars after blowing a .05. Is this a pick and choose situation.

[ImNewHere]

The civilian was well into the legal limit.

But he was impaired. If he were not impaired, the cop may be alive today.

Calvin Darling can still be charged with DUI. Nevada law states that if you are under the influence of alcohol to any degree and it makes you incapable of driving safely, you can be held responsible for your actions. However, it's up to investigators to decide whether his driving was impaired by the beers he said he had."

http://www.duilawblog.com/2009/05/articles/dui-news/nevada-dui-under-the-legal-limit/

This is Vegas. It's a party town. Gamble all you want, be discreet about the prostitutes, don't get into the drug scene and drink all you want. But if you do drink, don't get behind the wheel of a 2000 lb missle and launch it into anyone, let alone a police car.

Maybe your cops are expendable. Ours aren't.

[notluzn]

the man that got hit didn't cause the accident. If the cop hit a tree are they going to arrest the tree or cut it down?But he was impaired. If he were not impaired, the cop may be alive today.



http://www.duilawblog.com/2009/05/articles/dui-news/nevada-dui-under-the-legal-limit/

This is Vegas. It's a party town. Gamble all you want, be discreet about the prostitutes, don't get into the drug scene and drink all you want. But if you do drink, don't get behind the wheel of a 2000 lb missle and launch it into anyone, let alone a police car.

Maybe your cops are expendable. Ours aren't.

[ImNewHere]

the man that got hit didn't cause the accident. If the cop hit a tree are they going to arrest the tree or cut it down?

The cop didn't hit a tree. He was hit by an impaired driver.

And I expect him to spend the rest of his life in jail because of it.

[ImNewHere]

Anyone that is impaired at .035 must be freaking 50lbs. I think there is an excuse for the Officers poor judgment and putting this person.

Anyone who thinks they can do ANYTHING better after a few drinks needs AA.

[notluzn]

According to the report, he hit the guy in the truck.The cop didn't hit a tree. He was hit by an impaired driver.

And I expect him to spend the rest of his life in jail because of it.

[ImNewHere]

BTW, out here at some clubs, police officers will kick back out side and offer people to blow to give a breath test so they don't drive drunk. Anything under .06 they tell the peeps to be safe and careful and anyone above is told not to drive and have a friend drive. They watch people get in the cars after blowing a .05. Is this a pick and choose situation.

Acceptance of the nanny state. You really want the police to watch you 24/7 to make sure you're acting responsibly? You want them peeping in the windows of your home if someone decides they're going to report you for domestic violence?

[notluzn]

Not at all. Cops are not above the law and should respect their peace officer badge. No police officer has a right to go 109mph in a 45 mph zone with no light. I would put a years worth of pay checks on the fact that if the officer would have pulled over this guy he would have let him go with a .035 BAC. Acceptance of the nanny state. You really want the police to watch you 24/7 to make sure you're acting responsibly? You want them peeping in the windows of your home if someone decides they're going to report you for domestic violence?

[CMike11]

From the article

A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

[notluzn]

That guy is clearly wasted beyond any humanly possible ability.From the article

A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

[CMike11]

But he was impaired. If he were not impaired, the cop may be alive today..

You are assuming the cop wasn't at fault.

How do you know he was impaired? The alchohol test showed that he wasn't impaired based on the legal definition.

The cop might be alive today if:

1) He has his siren on

2) He had his light on

3) He wasn't going 109 mph

4) He has his safety belt on

5) He didn't hit the other vehicle

[ImNewHere]

Not at all. Cops are not above the law and should respect their peace officer badge. No police officer has a right to go 109mph in a 45 mph zone with no light. I would put a years worth of pay checks on the fact that if the officer would have pulled over this guy he would have let him go with a .035 BAC.

Cops are held to a higher standard than everyone else. And everyone is so bent on spitting on the grave of one of our dead officers, that they're posting any excuse for the impaired driver's decision to get out on the road that led to the death of one of our city's finest.

I can't think of one instance where anyone causing an accident, resulting in a death, with alcohol in their system, would be let go.

Without the impaired driver's drinking before getting behind the wheel, we'd have one more police officer and one less scumbag to put in jail.

[JenyEliza]

The cop didn't hit a tree. He was hit by an impaired driver.

No, according to the report, the COP HIT the impaired driver.

Not the otherway around.

[CMike11]

That guy is clearly wasted beyond any humanly possible ability.

Any you know this because?

[ImNewHere]

From the article

A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

You don't have to be 0.08 to be driving under the influence, or charged with it.

[ImNewHere]

You are assuming the cop wasn't at fault.

How do you know he was impaired? The alchohol test showed that he wasn't impaired based on the legal definition.

The cop might be alive today if:

1) He has his siren on

2) He had his light on

3) He wasn't going 109 mph

4) He has his safety belt on

5) He didn't hit the other vehicle

All of which would have been unnecessary if he weren't trying to respond to a phony domestic violence call, but that's irrelevant. The drunk driver killed him.

[CMike11]

I think if the cop is going at incredibly high speed without lights or a siren and hits another car, it's the cop that is at fault.

[johnrocks]

What a story, unbelievable.

[notluzn]

Would you also blame a sober driver that had a family in the car with a 10 month old in the back seat and killed by an Officer speeding and hitting them in the rear? Do not pick and choose victims. We're also not spitting on the Officer but clearly he was at fault.



Cops are held to a higher standard than everyone else. And everyone is so bent on spitting on the grave of one of our dead officers, that they're posting any excuse for the impaired driver's decision to get out on the road that led to the death of one of our city's finest.

I can't think of one instance where anyone causing an accident, resulting in a death, with alcohol in their system, would be let go.

Without the impaired driver's drinking before getting behind the wheel, we'd have one more police officer and one less scumbag to put in jail.

[ImNewHere]

That guy is clearly wasted beyond any humanly possible ability.

Are you even reading anything I'm posting? You don't have to be wasted to the point where you cling to the earth for fear of falling off to be impaired behind the wheel. Buzzed driving IS drunk driving. And that's what this jackass did. He drank, he got behind the wheel and a police officer is dead.

[Late2TheParty]

Without the impaired driver's drinking before getting behind the wheel, we'd have one more police officer and one less scumbag to put in jail.

The cop rearended the other driver. It probably didn't matter if the other driver was drunk or not in this situation.

[notluzn]

Any you know this because?I was being funny :)

[ImNewHere]

Would you also blame a sober driver that had a family in the car with a 10 month old in the back seat and killed by an Officer speeding and hitting them in the rear? Do not pick and choose victims. We're also not spitting on the Officer but clearly he was at fault.

So if we turn the facts of this case into "what if" scenarios, I'd reply that a sober driver would be watching where he was going, especially if he had family in the car.

[johnrocks]

The cop rearended the other driver. It probably didn't matter if the other driver was drunk or not in this situation.

Exactly.

[ImNewHere]

The cop rearended the other driver. It probably didn't matter if the other driver was drunk or not in this situation.

Killian... is that you?

[CMike11]

All of which would have been unnecessary if he weren't trying to respond to a phony domestic violence call, but that's irrelevant. The drunk driver killed him.

What drunk driver?

All the driver did was try to make a left. The cop was going at 109 mph without sirens and lights.

The cop hit the truck. The cop is at fault.

Why should the innocent drivers live be ruined for something that wasn't his fault?

[ImNewHere]

I think if the cop is going at incredibly high speed without lights or a siren and hits another car, it's the cop that is at fault.

Drink up! Then drive wherever you want.

It's the cop's fault.

[JenyEliza]

You are assuming the cop wasn't at fault.

How do you know he was impaired? The alchohol test showed that he wasn't impaired based on the legal definition.

The cop might be alive today if:

1) He has his siren on

2) He had his light on

3) He wasn't going 109 mph

4) He has his safety belt on

5) He didn't hit the other vehicle

Precisely.

Personal accountability for both involved in this accident.

The man who drove under the influence should be charged with DUI. He made a life-altering decision to drive under the influence of alcohol and should be held accountable for it. That's it, though. He did not cause the accident and should not be charged with the officer's death.

The COP, unfortunately, paid a high price for his actions (or lack thereof). However, *he* made life-altering critical decisions behind the wheel of his cruiser, that unfortunately ended his life.

It is *not* the fault of the man THE COP hit that he was in the cop's way.

HOW would anyone know a cop was going to come from behind and cream them at 109 mph, absent lights and siren? Drunk or sober, how would they know this?

Does the man THE COP hit have eyes in the back of his head?

WHY would he know the cop was behind him? Traveling at 109 mph, it is very likely that the man who was hit didn't (literally) know what hit him until he woke up in the hospital. And that would be the case drunk or sober.

109 mph is FAST. VERY FAST.

Deadly fast.

[notluzn]

So if we turn the facts of this case into "what if" scenarios, I'd reply that a sober driver would be watching where he was going, especially if he had family in the car. Just so we know whats going on here, Who hit Who?

[czzzaar]

Why is it 109MPH. Why not 100, or 110, or 90 plus. If the truck did not have a radar in the back, it sounds like an agenda driven story.

Apparently there is a black box in the back of every patrol car that records back 30 seconds from the point of impact. It detects whether or not the lights and sirens were in use. Measure the length of the skid marks narrowed the speed to 90 mph.

The cop was wrong in this instance. The truth was withheld until after the jerk got his big, elaborate funeral.

The only agenda here was to cover for a cop that was breaking the rules, like most cops do.

May the idiot rest in peace.

[ImNewHere]

Why should the innocent drivers live be ruined for something that wasn't his fault?

That is my point. He is NOT innocent and it IS his fault. He was drinking, he got behind the wheel and a cop is dead while trying to do his best in the line of duty.

He's got a lot of fans on this thread and so be it. Bottom line is, he's going to have a lot of people like me on his jury when he's tried. I don't think he's going to get off as easy as you hope he will. It's still illegal to drive under the influence and you don't have to be over the legal limit to be convicted of drunk driving, especially if it results in a death.

[CMike11]

Drink up! Then drive wherever you want.

It's the cop's fault.

In this case it is the cop's fault. The article mentions that 109 mph, covers a football field in about two seconds.

I don't think anyone could get out of the way of a car going that fast.

The fault was that of the cop. If he was going that fast it was up to him to make sure he doesn't hit anything.

[notluzn]

If thats the best the cop was doing then god help Las Vegas :)) :)) :))

[CaptC]

But he was impaired. If he were not impaired, the cop may be alive today.

If you paid attention: The OFFICER was SPEEDING without Emergency Lights and/or Siren! Now, who was in the wrong?

But if you do drink, don't get behind the wheel of a 2000 lb missle and launch it into anyone, let alone a police car.

You are assuming the citizen hit the officer instead of the other way around. :wall:

[JenyEliza]

So if we turn the facts of this case into "what if" scenarios, I'd reply that a sober driver would be watching where he was going, especially if he had family in the car.

How do you watch for someone going 109 mph behind you?

With the eyes in the back of your head?

Even someone sober would be caught off-guard by someone traveling *that fast* behind them, absent lights and siren to alert them.

109 mph is ****ING FAST, dude. :wall:

[czzzaar]

Ok....from my understanding, the officer hit the imparied driver (who was impaired against the law) while speeding over and above the allowable limit (which is against law/leo rules), with no lights or siren (which is against law/leo rules) and wearing no seatbelt (again, against the law/leo rules).

It does not appear the impaired driver hit the cop. I could be wrong. However, that being the case, then I would say it's not the fault of the imapired driver that the cop is dead. Rather, the cop should have made different decisions/taken different actions to prevent this accident and his death. Namely, he could have followed the set standards for responding to *any* call. (ie, lights, siren, etc to warn the public of his approach so that other motorists can get out of his way). He also could have properly secured his person in the vehicle, per Nevada state law, which may or may not have actually saved his life.

I am not saying the impaired driver should not be held accountable for driving while impaired. By all means, he should be prosecuted for driving impaired. However, I don't see how this accident was his fault. What am I not understanding?

Please feel free to correct me where I am wrong.

Legally, he was not impaired. The cops are dirty, and this one was a jerk.

[ImNewHere]

In this case it is the cop's fault. The article mentions that 109 mph, covers a football field in about two seconds.

I don't think anyone could get out of the way of a car going that fast.

The fault was that of the cop. If he was going that fast it was up to him to make sure he doesn't hit anything.

Think whatever you like. I could go on and on about the evils of drinking and getting behind the wheel when you're impaired. But nobody is going to listen. It's why tens of thousands of people die in drunk driving accidents every year.

Enjoy. But realize that we don't take losing our police officers lightly in this city. Maybe in the other places, that's OK. But the guy is going to have to answer for his crime here. I guess it's lucky for him that he served in a town that honors the service the police department provides.

[czzzaar]

That is my point. He is NOT innocent and it IS his fault. He was drinking, he got behind the wheel and a cop is dead while trying to do his best in the line of duty.

He's got a lot of fans on this thread and so be it. Bottom line is, he's going to have a lot of people like me on his jury when he's tried. I don't think he's going to get off as easy as you hope he will. It's still illegal to drive under the influence and you don't have to be over the legal limit to be convicted of drunk driving, especially if it results in a death.

If you can't be unbiased then you don't belong on a jury. There are a lot of people like me in Las Vegas talking and I have not heard one person that agrees with your sorry opinion.

[czzzaar]

Think whatever you like. I could go on and on about the evils of drinking and getting behind the wheel when you're impaired. But nobody is going to listen. It's why tens of thousands of people die in drunk driving accidents every year.

Enjoy. But realize that we don't take losing our police officers lightly in this city. Maybe in the other places, that's OK. But the guy is going to have to answer for his crime here. I guess it's lucky for him that he served in a town that honors the service the police department provides.

Watch. The charges will be completely dropped.

[JenyEliza]

Apparently there is a black box in the back of every patrol car that records back 30 seconds from the point of impact. It detects whether or not the lights and sirens were in use. Measure the length of the skid marks narrowed the speed to 90 mph.

The cop was wrong in this instance. The truth was withheld until after the jerk got his big, elaborate funeral.

The only agenda here was to cover for a cop that was breaking the rules, like most cops do.

May the idiot rest in peace.

There you have it.

Thank you for being a voice of reason.

I'm sorry the cop lost his life, but had he taken proper steps and followed procedures, he might actually still be alive today.

To reiterate:

The COP HIT THE IMPAIRED DRIVER, not the other way around.

The cop might be alive today if:

1) He had his siren on

2) He had his lights on

3) He wasn't going 109 mph

4) He had his safety belt on

5) He had driven defensively and not hit the other vehicle

The COP did not take these simple measures to ensure HIS SAFETY, nevermind that of the MOTORING PUBLIC, and now he is dead.

Bottom line: The death of this officer was caused by HIS own careless mistakes. Not by that of the impaired driver HE HIT.

[czzzaar]

In a unrelated case, one of my co-workers went the wrong way on an onramp several weeks ago and killed a beautiful 19 year-old woman. An only daughter/child. At the hospital he was tested at .20 BAC. Now that is a person who murdered and who deserves whatever the law can do to him.

A few weeks ago he was accidentally released, but turned himself in the next day when ordered to do so. If I was him I would have high-tailed it to Mexico and been on the next flight to mother Russia.

He's going away for a long time and deserves it. This poor guy that pulled in front of the speeding cop needs to go free or the whole city is going to know that the cops in this town are dirty.

[czzzaar]

There you have it.

Thank you for being a voice of reason.

I'm sorry the cop lost his life, but had he taken proper steps and followed procedures, he might actually still be alive today.

To reiterate:

The COP HIT THE IMPAIRED DRIVER, not the other way around.

The cop might be alive today if:

1) He had his siren on

2) He had his lights on

3) He wasn't going 109 mph

4) He had his safety belt on

5) He had driven defensively and not hit the other vehicle

The COP did not take these simple measures to ensure HIS SAFETY, nevermind that of the MOTORING PUBLIC, and now he is dead.

Bottom line: The death of this officer was caused by HIS own careless mistakes. Not by that of the impaired driver HE HIT.

1. The defendant was not legally impaired, but he was still framed and his entire life has be disrupted. He will have to live with the results of this tragic accident for the rest of his life.

2. No sober person could possible judged the speed of the patrol car under the conditions presented. What if it had been a family in that car? There surely would have been multiple deaths.

3. The cop slammed on his brakes and tried to swerve but he was moving so fast that an accident was impossible to avoid. The cop endangered his own life and the lives of everyone on Flamingo Blvd. by his irresponsible actions.

[CaptC]

I have a problem with the cop driving 109 mph on a city street. :confused:

Where I live not even in case of an "officer down" call is ANY officer (city, parish, or state) allowed to drive in excess of 20 mph OVER the POSTED Speed Limit.

There have been cases of officers being suspended (without pay) for violating that rule. :dance:

[CMike11]

That is uncalled for.:naughty:

He is entitled to his opinon, just like others are entitled to their opinion.

[JenyEliza]

I guess it's lucky for him that he served in a town that honors the service the police department provides.

In other words, Vegas cops are as crooked as Atlanta's cops?

Apparently they cover the ass of their boys in blue just like the cops in here in Atlanta that took out a 98 year old "drug dealer" great-great-great granny, courtesy of their made up bogus "no-knock" warrant and planted drugs in the home of the innocent church-going old woman after they killed her a couple of Thanksgivings ago.

Yeah. The thin blue line has a way of doing that kind of ****. And then you guys wonder why the public has NO trust for the police.

Right. :rolleyes:

Perhaps it's because the public has been abused one too many times by these special elites in uniform that we don't believe every word out of a cop's mouth anymore?

I know I sure the hell don't--but I used to. I used to think all cops were noble servants of the public who put their lives on the line for us every day. I used to believe they were people to be respected and honored, but I don't anymore. I've seen the absolute evil they have inflicted on innocent people far too many times in my 46 years. It has happened to a member of my family, so I have personal experience with bad cops. And...we have cops in our family I wouldn't trust to feed my dogs.

Hell, I used to tell my kids that if they ever got lost to look for a police officer and he would make sure they found me and they would get home safe and sound. I would NEVER give a young child that advice now. NEVER.

Bottom line: I trust cops like I trust Barack Hussein Obama.

I don't. They are guilty until proven innocent to me. I keep them at arms distance and I am wary of them until I have GOOD reason to believe they are above board and honest cops.

[CMike11]

Think whatever you like. I could go on and on about the evils of drinking and getting behind the wheel when you're impaired. But nobody is going to listen. It's why tens of thousands of people die in drunk driving accidents every year.

Enjoy. But realize that we don't take losing our police officers lightly in this city. Maybe in the other places, that's OK. But the guy is going to have to answer for his crime here. I guess it's lucky for him that he served in a town that honors the service the police department provides.

You keep ignoring that he wasn't drunk. The limit is 0.08 he was at 0.035. Less than half the limit.

How do you avoid getting hit by a police car going 109 mph in a residential area?

[roger teekell]

You don't have to be 0.08 to be driving under the influence, or charged with it.

But to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law??

Pretty much..

Look...No one respects our officers more than I do..

And two children losing their father is extrenmely TRAGIC...

But regulations and laws are there for a reason...

And as far as I can see the only one who was operating outside of those laws and regulations when this tragedy occurred was the officer...

I for some reason feel rotten typing this out but facts are indeed facts...

[CaptC]

That is uncalled for.:naughty:

He is entitled to his opinon, just like others are entitled to their opinion.
I deleted that post, but I don't know why. I'm entitled to MY opinion, too.

[CMike11]

I deleted that post, but I don't know why. I'm entitled to MY opinion, too.

Because you attacked the poster, rather than what he was saying.

[roger teekell]

Apparently there is a black box in the back of every patrol car that records back 30 seconds from the point of impact. It detects whether or not the lights and sirens were in use. Measure the length of the skid marks narrowed the speed to 90 mph.

The cop was wrong in this instance. The truth was withheld until after the jerk got his big, elaborate funeral.

The only agenda here was to cover for a cop that was breaking the rules, like most cops do.

May the idiot rest in peace.I don't see where calling the deceased an IDIOT makes your position more acceptable..

The man was an officer of the law as well as a husband and father...

No evidence here that he was an idiot...

Simply made a mistake..

[JenyEliza]

He's going away for a long time and deserves it. This poor guy that pulled in front of the speeding cop needs to go free or the whole city is going to know that the cops in this town are dirty.

Don't look for that to happen anytime soon.

It took MONTHS of high-pressure here in Atlanta to hold a bunch of dirty cops responsible for the MURDER of a 98 year old great-great-great granny that the vice squad framed with a bogus no-knock warrant and planted pot on *after* they killed her.

You may recall the case?

It got international exposure and destroyed the credibility of the Atlanta Police Department once and for all. Nobody in this town trusts the APD--vice or otherwise--and this lack of trust extends out to the 'burbs here as well. This is one town where you want to keep your distance from the police---even if you've never committed a crime. :hand: Proceed with caution. :hand:

Once tainted, it is near impossible to restore a good reputation. This goes for police officers too.

[JenyEliza]

In the moments before officer James Manor plowed into a pickup attempting a left turn, he was driving his patrol car 109 mph without flashing lights or siren, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie said Wednesday.

The speed was the equivalent of traveling the length of a football field in about two seconds. It gave Manor little time to avoid hitting Calvin Darling's truck May 7. At the time of impact, after braking and trying to steer out of the way, Manor was still driving 90 mph.

Gillespie called Manor's speed in the 45-mph zone on Flamingo Road "excessive and unsafe," even if his lights and siren had been on. The facts of the accident probably will alter the charges Darling faces, the sheriff said.

"The facts that we have I think certainly change the charges that are there," a stern Gillespie said in an afternoon news conference. "We do believe his speed was a significant factor in what took place in this accident. So yes, we are looking at those original charges."

Darling, 45, was arrested for driving under the influence and failing to yield to an emergency vehicle. Gillespie said he couldn't see Darling facing the latter charge because Manor's lights and siren were off.

The crash, which resulted in the first death of an on-duty Metropolitan Police Department officer since Henry Prendes was killed in 2006, shook up the department and the community. Thousands attended Manor's funeral Friday.

In the days after the 28-year-old officer's death, a stream of mourners paid their respects at the crash site.

The information about the lack of lights and siren on Manor's patrol car reversed what Gillespie first said after the accident. The sheriff initially was adamant that Manor and an officer in a second patrol car were on their way to a call with lights and sirens on.

Yeah, right Chief. :rolleyes:

[roger teekell]

Yeah, right Chief. :rolleyes:

The Chief was going on was said by the witnesses on the scene...

But when the FACTS came out the Sherrif presented them in FULL and TRUTHFULLY...

You have made great points up to now Jeny..Don't start blaming someone that did the right thing.

[jimjames418]

the man that got hit didn't cause the accident. If the cop hit a tree are they going to arrest the tree or cut it down?
We actually had a case a years back where a person was ordered to cut down a tree that protected his home from vehicles failing to make the turn in front of his home.

He lived on a road that had a 90 degree turn and the tree protected his home many times prior to the order to cut the tree. One week after he cut the tree down, a driver failed to make the turn and ended up in his bedroom.

The county paid (with my tax dollars) for the repairs to his home and put in a barrier to prevent it happening again. :wall:

[JenyEliza]

Further:

"The facts that we have I think certainly change the charges that are there," a stern Gillespie said in an afternoon news conference. "We do believe his speed was a significant factor in what took place in this accident. So yes, we are looking at those original charges."

Darling, 45, was arrested for driving under the influence and failing to yield to an emergency vehicle. Gillespie said he couldn't see Darling facing the latter charge because Manor's lights and siren were off.

and...


The information about the lack of lights and siren on Manor's patrol car reversed what Gillespie first said after the accident. The sheriff initially was adamant that Manor and an officer in a second patrol car were on their way to a call with lights and sirens on.

and....the butt kicker here....


The investigation now shows that the second officer also was not running lights or a siren, Gillespie said. The second officer's speed has not been determined.

Gillespie said that when he addressed the media many hours after the accident, he had been given incorrect information by first responders to the crash. They said Manor and the second officer had their lights and sirens on.

Evidence of thin blue line ass covering. A-yup. Sure looks like a familiar MO to me. :snooty: :naughty:

"They were there right after it, and they thought that that's what they were told," the sheriff said. "And we didn't interview the secondary officer right away because it was a very traumatic event."

Stammering doesn't make it so, Chief. And your excuses don't wash.

You didn't review jack-**** because when your boys pull together a ******** story, you buy it hook line and sinker. You didn't WANT to know the truth, you were prepared to fully destroy a man's life on the word of your bogus crooked cops.

You disgust me. And you make a mockery out of our laws and the badge you wear.

The department will review and change how it collects and releases information after fatal accidents involving officers, Gillespie said. He said the department wasn't considering disciplinary action against those officers who relayed the information.

Interesting that nobody is facing disciplinary action for relaying false information about this so-called "accident".

Yeah, I just bet things are gonna change there, Chief. :rolleyes:

Right. Sure.

And I have oceanfront property along the strip I'd like to sell ya...... :))

[jimjames418]

I wonder how much Darling will get when he sues the city for the illegal acts of their agent, the police officer.

I feel bad that the police officer was killed, however no one is to blame except himself. What ever happened to the "personal responsibility" concept we like to use?

[JenyEliza]

We actually had a case a years back where a person was ordered to cut down a tree that protected his home from vehicles failing to make the turn in front of his home.

He lived on a road that had a 90 degree turn and the tree protected his home many times prior to the order to cut the tree. One week after he cut the tree down, a driver failed to make the turn and ended up in his bedroom.

The county paid (with my tax dollars) for the repairs to his home and put in a barrier to prevent it happening again. :wall:

Our house is on a hairpin curve. Several times we've had cars come within inches of the house--nearest my kids' bedrooms.

One narrowly missed our front door/living room and the (illegal alien) who was driving thoughtfully rang the bell and apologized and begged me not to call the police. Because he actually stayed around to apologize, I didn't call them and said no worried and told him to drive more carefully. The others I would have had hauled away if I could have.

I have been told (by our county code enforcement office) I cannot have a landscape boulder brought in and placed in our yard in the path of oncoming traffic--otherwiswe if someone is seriously injured I could face charges or be sued, or both. Ok if me or my kids are hurt or killed in our house, but how dare I take steps to protect my family? How screwed up is that?

So....I planted a large hedge along the property line that will (hopefully) catch any speeding intruders before they can hit our house. It's better than nothing.

Next house won't be on a dangerous curve.

[I am the Eggman]

All of which would have been unnecessary if he weren't trying to respond to a phony domestic violence call, but that's irrelevant. The drunk driver killed him.
Man, maybe you need a little less cowbell... :rolleyes:

[JenyEliza]

Man, maybe you need a little less cowbell... :rolleyes:

Pretty funnny, Eggman! :)) :)) :))

[FidelisAdMortem]

I thought it was against the law for police officers to go above the speed limit without having their emergency lights on. And even then, unless they have the bad guy in sight they are limited to 10-15 mph above the speed limit. At least that is what my police officer daughter says.

Wrong.

[Panhead0422]

Are you even reading anything I'm posting? You don't have to be wasted to the point where you cling to the earth for fear of falling off to be impaired behind the wheel. Buzzed driving IS drunk driving. And that's what this jackass did. He drank, he got behind the wheel and a police officer is dead.


With a BAC of .035, my guess is that he had had maybe two beers. At a BAC of .035 he would probably be considered as legally SOBER, not legally intoxicated or impaired. As to the "failure of a "field sobriety test"", I think that the fact that he had just been hit by a cop doing a minimum of ninety miles per hour would most probably guarantee that failure. That he was even able to participate in the test is a miracle. While not trying to disrespect the officers at the scene, they would have been predisposed to to conclude that he had failed the test. If an officer has reason to request that you take a field sobriety test, he or she is already inclined to presume your failure (human nature).
What I read in the original article makes me give the benefit of the doubt to the driver of the pickup truck. I am sorry as hell about the officer that died, but I still have to give the presumption of innocence to the truck driver. I am going to predict that the charges against him will be dropped. Based on the information that I have read to this point, the case against the pickup driver is extremely weak to non existent.

[Panhead0422]

i think if the cop is going at incredibly high speed without lights or a siren and hits another car, it's the cop that is at fault.

+1

[Panhead0422]

Drink up! Then drive wherever you want.

It's the cop's fault.

Glad to see that you finally said it. The evidence so far does prove THAT IN THIS CASE the cop was at fault. Not the other way around. BTW I realize that you were being sarcastic.

[Talk2Bill]

I am sorry but it sounds like it was the cops fault. Even if the pick up truck driver had not been drinking it seems likely that the result would have been the same.

cops are human and they have accidents or in this case make stupid choices. if not for the speed he would be alive.

[BROEDERBOND]

And his blood alcohol was........?

sober or not he (the cop)was driving recklessly and thus got his just reward.

[Rhonda]

All of which would have been unnecessary if he weren't trying to respond to a phony domestic violence call, but that's irrelevant. The drunk driver killed him.

Why is that irrelevent?
The adreniline rush killed the officer. Not Darling.

The circumstances all played a part, but in the end, the officer made a choice to not use his siren and lights, putting many people in danger of his 2000lb missile at a rate of speed that is simply ridiculous. He killed himself

I am happy that there was not a pedestrian crossing the street

[ImNewHere]

You keep ignoring that he wasn't drunk. The limit is 0.08 he was at 0.035. Less than half the limit.

How do you avoid getting hit by a police car going 109 mph in a residential area?

I'm not ignoring anything. You can't tell me that if you have alcohol in your system that you're not impaired. Nothing you do after you drink is ever better. No matter how you want to spin this, a guy got on the road after drinking and a police officer is dead.

[ImNewHere]

If you can't be unbiased then you don't belong on a jury. There are a lot of people like me in Las Vegas talking and I have not heard one person that agrees with your sorry opinion.

Clark County has over 2 million people. And a lot will be like me too. I have not heard one person that agrees with your opinion either.

[Rhonda]

Wrong.

How far above the speed limit is an Officer allowed to go, when responding to a call in NYC?

And what is the speed limit, where the accident took place? Does anyone know?

[ImNewHere]

Watch. The charges will be completely dropped.

You're on.

[notluzn]

I'm not ignoring anything. You can't tell me that if you have alcohol in your system that you're not impaired. Nothing you do after you drink is ever better. No matter how you want to spin this, a guy got on the road after drinking and a police officer is dead.
Wow, you must think that your cops are Angels and could never **** up.

[ImNewHere]

That is uncalled for.:naughty:

He is entitled to his opinon, just like others are entitled to their opinion.

I appreciate that, Mike. But if someone has to stoop so low as to compare me to the Nazi Party (an obvious TOS violation) to make their point, then I'm sure I'm doing the right thing because neither he, or anyone else can refute my argument.

[notluzn]

Here in AZ, cops get into trouble for speeding. Hell we've had one that killed himself because he was Hotrodding and playing Dukes of hazardHow far above the speed limit is an Officer allowed to go, when responding to a call in NYC?

And what is the speed limit, where the accident took place? Does anyone know?

[notluzn]

I appreciate that, Mike. But if someone has to stoop so low as to compare me to the Nazi Party (an obvious TOS violation) to make their point, then I'm sure I'm doing the right thing because neither he, or anyone else can refute my argument.
We beat your argument to a Pulp and you refuse to see that the Officer was being a jackass and thank god that he hit a truck and not a car with children in it.

[ImNewHere]

I have a problem with the cop driving 109 mph on a city street. :confused:

Where I live not even in case of an "officer down" call is ANY officer (city, parish, or state) allowed to drive in excess of 20 mph OVER the POSTED Speed Limit.

There have been cases of officers being suspended (without pay) for violating that rule. :dance:

Well, maybe you'd feel differently if you needed their help quickly. The officer was serving our city honorably and thought he was going to rescue a child who was in danger. In your Mayberry RFD world, maybe the cops don't drive fast and they keep just one bullet in their front pocket. But in our world, I like our cops to be armed and willing to get to a distress call as soon as possible.

[Rhonda]

Here in AZ, cops get into trouble for speeding. Hell we've had one that killed himself because he was Hotrodding and playing Dukes of hazard

In my part of the country, cops are untouchable. It is sickening, I used to trust them, but have had a traffic stop that turned out to be utterly ridiculous, and guess who paid, figuretively and literally.

When a police officer does those kinds of things, and other officers know about it, it does something to the trust you used to have in the enire Police force of your city

[notluzn]

Yeah, there are some bad cops but most are good cops. Dangerous Job and having to put up with Stupid Drunks and never know whos going to kill you. In my part of the country, cops are untouchable. It is sickening, I used to trust them, but have had a traffic stop that turned out to be utterly ridiculous, and guess who paid, figuretively and literally.

When a police officer does those kinds of things, and other officers know about it, it does something to the trust you used to have in the enire Police force of your city

[Rhonda]

Yeah, there are some bad cops but most are good cops. Dangerous Job and having to put up with Stupid Drunks and never know whos going to kill you.

Indeed, you are right.

All I am saying is that the good cops are overshadowed many times by the action of a few zealots

I was profoundly affected by the fact that the good cop in my scenario stood by and allowed a bad cop to be bad. That was what affected me the most

[ImNewHere]

In other words, Vegas cops are as crooked as Atlanta's cops?

I'd say the cops in Vegas are among the best in the nation, if not the best. Don't twist the words or try to imply I'm posting anything else. That would be just false. Even czzzarr, who doesn't agree with me, would admit our peace officers are honorable people.

Your contempt of law enforcement officers in general explains your view.

Another argument shot down.

[ImNewHere]

But to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law??

Pretty much..

Look...No one respects our officers more than I do..

And two children losing their father is extrenmely TRAGIC...

But regulations and laws are there for a reason...

And as far as I can see the only one who was operating outside of those laws and regulations when this tragedy occurred was the officer...

I for some reason feel rotten typing this out but facts are indeed facts...

Did you read the RJ this morning? He was NOT operating outside of any law.

[ImNewHere]

I wonder how much Darling will get when he sues the city for the illegal acts of their agent, the police officer.

What? Free beer for the rest of his life?

He's getting hootch for the duration of his sentence in the High Desert State Prison about 90 miles NE of Vegas.

[ImNewHere]

sober or not he (the cop)was driving recklessly and thus got his just reward.

The cop got his "just reward."

Could there be any more contempt for law enforcement officers than that?

[JenyEliza]

In regards to the man who was HIT by the cop being DUI, from the article:


The sheriff also maintained that Darling's arrest for driving under the influence was valid. It wasn't yet known whether Darling was indeed under the influence.

"He told the officers he had been drinking, and he failed a DUI field test," Gillespie said.

A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

Clark County District Attorney David Roger declined to comment through his secretary because his office had not yet received the case. Darling's first court appearance is scheduled for June 8.

I suspect this man was not actually "impaired" at the time of the accident.

Perhaps if he had been a 4 foot tall, 94lb woman, I would agree that he was impaired. Still I would not agree that he caused the accident.

Regretfully, the onus is on the dead officer who made several critical decisions that sealed his fate. These decisions have been repeatedly outlined in this thread, so I won't go there again.

Bottom line: The officer caused his own death by speeding with no lights or siren going, then HITTING the other man's vehicle. Sober or drunk (and I don't think the civilian here was), *nobody* could have gotten out of the way of a vehicle going 109mph fast enough to avoid being hit.

[Rhonda]

I'd say the cops in Vegas are among the best in the nation, if not the best. Don't twist the words or try to imply I'm posting anything else. That would be just false. Even czzzarr, who doesn't agree with me, would admit our peace officers are honorable people.

Your contempt of law enforcement officers in general explains your view.

Another argument shot down.

You know, ImNewHere, I think that Jen Eliza and myself are classic examples of why it is important to not make excuses when a man who happens to be a Police Officer, makes a deadly mistake. It is about trust.

We are both law abiding citizens, that have been affected by one lone police officer. And what followed is the worse part. It helps in matters of trust to have an advocate of the law to call a duck a duck

[ImNewHere]

Why is that irrelevent?
The adreniline rush killed the officer. Not Darling.

The circumstances all played a part, but in the end, the officer made a choice to not use his siren and lights, putting many people in danger of his 2000lb missile at a rate of speed that is simply ridiculous. He killed himself

I am happy that there was not a pedestrian crossing the street

Rhonda, I love you. You know that. But I also know how you feel about the police. Please.

[Rhonda]

sober or not he (the cop)was driving recklessly and thus got his just reward.

Dude that is just wrong

[ImNewHere]

How far above the speed limit is an Officer allowed to go, when responding to a call in NYC?

And what is the speed limit, where the accident took place? Does anyone know?

At least in Las Vegas, cops have a "Code 3" rule which allows them to decide when it's appropriate to use the lights and when not to. From what I understand, it's a judgment call. He didn't operate as a "rogue cop" on the fringe of professionalism, he did what he needed to do in order to respond to a distress call.

And he did it while sober. Unlike the surviving party of this accident.

We're gonna fry this guy.

[Rhonda]

Rhonda, I love you. You know that. But I also know how you feel about the police. Please.

And I respect the hell out of you. But you obviously do not know how I feel about the Police. I had a reaction to a bad cop. That is all

I respect what our Officers do and the sacrifices they make. Big time.

I made one thread about an incident, and you think I have distain for all Police officers? That is just not true

[ImNewHere]

Dude that is just wrong

It is wrong. But typical of the hatred I'm seeing for our police officers in this thread.

[Rhonda]

At least in Las Vegas, cops have a "Code 3" rule which allows them to decide when it's appropriate to use the lights and when not to. From what I understand, it's a judgment call. He didn't operate as a "rogue cop" on the fringe of professionalism, he did what he needed to do in order to respond to a distress call.

And he did it while sober. Unlike the surviving party of this accident.

We're gonna fry this guy.

I am very sorry for your loss. I truly am sorry!

I just think he made a very deadly decision. Why does someone else need to pay for his decision? I hate drunk drivers. As you know my husband was killed because of another driver. No one has ever "paid".

How much did the guy have to drink? I can't seem to find that

[JenyEliza]

In my part of the country, cops are untouchable. It is sickening, I used to trust them, but have had a traffic stop that turned out to be utterly ridiculous, and guess who paid, figuretively and literally.

When a police officer does those kinds of things, and other officers know about it, it does something to the trust you used to have in the enire Police force of your city

Exactly! :clap:

[ImNewHere]

Wow, you must think that your cops are Angels and could never **** up.

Dude, in ten years of living in Vegas, I might have had four interactions with the police here. Two of them were letting them go in front of me at Starbucks and the other two they were writing me tickets. At no time were they ever less than completely professional.

If you're painting the cops in your area with that brush, then maybe I won't spend some weekend in your part of the country to catch a Diamondbacks game.

[blackcatrun]

But he was impaired. If he were not impaired, the cop may be alive today.



http://www.duilawblog.com/2009/05/articles/dui-news/nevada-dui-under-the-legal-limit/

This is Vegas. It's a party town. Gamble all you want, be discreet about the prostitutes, don't get into the drug scene and drink all you want. But if you do drink, don't get behind the wheel of a 2000 lb missle and launch it into anyone, let alone a police car.

Maybe your cops are expendable. Ours aren't.

No one needs cast any blame for an accident. People love to think some one has to be blamed but things happen...it's just a fact of life.

For the breath tests I warn folks that these test kits will register posative after consuming some fruits and citris gums, some breads like one has consumed a intoxicating beverage. Eating certian fruits and vegitables and some foods will register over the legal limit on a breath test for a short time after consumption. This happened to my fathers brother whom never drank a drop of any kinds of alcholic beverages due to his being a diabetic.. after he was badly injured when a pick up traveling at high rate of speed slammed into him head on after crossing the line on a curve.. the police applyed a breath test to him. He blew above the legal limit..however it was pointed out by the drivers of the ambulance that they had given him a high fructouse drink to off set his blood sugar count,which blows high numbers on the test kits after being drank. They took a sample of his blood and no booze was involved.

[ImNewHere]

I suspect this man was not actually "impaired" at the time of the accident.

Well, you can suspect anything you like, but this guy is now the suspect. And I hope that quickly turns to manslaughter. And that suspicion quickly turns to conviction.

[JenyEliza]

I am very sorry for your loss. I truly am sorry!

I just think he made a very deadly decision. Why does someone else need to pay for his decision? I hate drunk drivers. As you know my husband was killed because of another driver. No one has ever "paid".

How much did the guy have to drink? I can't seem to find that

From the article, which INH seems to wish to ignore:


A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.


In a 6ft tall, 170lb (est.) man, I don't believe this BAC would mean he was "impaired", much less "drunk".

Perhaps if he was 4 ft tall and 94lbs, I could buy the "drunk" or "impaired" argument, but I don't think this is the case.

Hope this helps.

[ImNewHere]

No one needs cast any blame for an accident. People love to think some one has to be blamed but things happen...it's just a fact of life.

For the breath tests I warn folks that these test kits will register posative after consuming some fruits and citris gums, some breads like one has consumed a intoxicating beverage. Eating certian fruits and vegitables and some foods will register over the legal limit on a breath test for a short time after consumption. This happened to my fathers brother whom never drank a drop of any kinds of alcholic beverages due to his being a diabetic.. after he was badly injured when a pick up traveling at high rate of speed slammed into him head on after crossing the line on a curve.. the police applyed a breath test to him. He blew above the legal limit..however it was pointed out by the drivers of the ambulance that they had given him a high fructouse drink to off set his blood sugar count,which blows high numbers on the test kits after being drank. They took a sample of his blood and no booze was involved.

The guy admitted to drinking, but nice try, Killian.

The eating of four loaves of bread before driving isn't going to fly.

[notluzn]

Cops in Vegas walk on Water and are seated at the right hand of the father.

[notluzn]

The guy admitted to drinking, but nice try, Killian.

The eating of four loaves of bread before driving isn't going to fly.Making an excuse for a bad cop is not a good idea. In all reality he killed himself from making a poor judgement.

[JenyEliza]

Well, you can suspect anything you like, but this guy is now the suspect. And I hope that quickly turns to manslaughter. And that suspicion quickly turns to conviction.

Based on the facts presented (thus far), your hopes are quite likely to be in vain. The DA doesn't have a lot to work with. One of the charges is already being dropped (the failure to yield to an emergency vehicle), and he doesn't appear to be legally "drunk", by legal standards.


The sheriff also maintained that Darling's arrest for driving under the influence was valid. It wasn't yet known whether Darling was indeed under the influence.

"He told the officers he had been drinking, and he failed a DUI field test," Gillespie said.

A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

Anyone--sober or drunk--would fail a physical field sobriety test requring one to touch their nose or walk a straight line after being hit by a vehicle going 109mph. The man who was hit is *damn lucky* he survived the accident caused by the officer's RECKLESS DRIVING.

In fact, if the 2nd responding officer's were *so* shook up by witnessing the accident scene that they couldn't get the facts straight (ie, they said lights and siren were going when in fact they were *not), then HOW would the man who was ACTUALLY HIT at 109mph be able pass the sobriety test accurately? Wouldn't he be MORE shook up than the 2nd responders?

I'd say so.

The Sherriff has already admitted that his officer was wrong to be driving with no lights or siren, and charges were being re-evaluated.

You are going to be sorely disappointed when this whole case falls apart and the City of Las Vegas is writing a big check to the officer's victim. Because I predict that is *exactly* what will happen.

Watch and see.

[blackcatrun]

The guy admitted to drinking, but nice try, Killian.

The eating of four loaves of bread before driving isn't going to fly.


I have a name use it. I already knew that the guy had been drinking also. It's not any excuse for apolice car going 109 miles an hour in a 45 zone.

I wanted to make a point because you are using symantics for an arguement,your ducking....and quacking. Rather angery while quacking too.

Cause it is a fact
that breath test kits will register if one eats certian foods. Onions will blow a numer on the things is a point to be remebered.

[ImNewHere]

Cops in Vegas walk on Water and are seated at the right hand of the father.

You're my brother, and you know that. A Camaro-driving outcast in the family, but still family.

I'm not saying that cops walk on water. I'm not saying they're the chosen people. I think they're largely tools of the New World Order and we will one day live in a Soviet-style nation with them having unlimited power.

I'm saying in this case, the cop was doing his job. He had not been drinking... And the professionalism I've experienced with the police in this city, I have nothing but respect for him.

And if he's responding to a distress call and he's dead because some clown got on the road after drinking, there need to be consequences.

You all have this opinion and you're defending the criminal. Fine. But you didn't lose one of your city's finest. We did.

[ImNewHere]

I have a name use it. I already knew that the guy had been drinking also. It's not any excuse for apolice car going 109 miles an hour in a 45 zone.

I wanted to make a point because you are using symantics for an arguement,your ducking....and quacking. Rather angery while quacking too.

Cause it is a fact
that breath test kits will register if one eats certian foods. Onions will blow a numer on the things is a point to be remebered.

Yeah, but your posts sound a lot like the excuses Killian used to make when he was defending the right to get behind the wheel of a car after drinking and use bread as the reason for the positive breathalyzer tests.

And yeah, I am angry. I'm angry that we lost one of our city's finest. Apparently, there isn't a lot of respect for law enforcement in many cities in America. God help the rest of you if you ever need their help.

[blackcatrun]

You're my brother, and you know that. A Camaro-driving outcast in the family, but still family.

I'm not saying that cops walk on water. I'm not saying they're the chosen people. I think they're largely tools of the New World Order and we will one day live in a Soviet-style nation with them having unlimited power.

I'm saying in this case, the cop was doing his job. He had not been drinking... And the professionalism I've experienced with the police in this city, I have nothing but respect for him.

And if he's responding to a distress call and he's dead because some clown got on the road after drinking, there need to be consequences.

You all have this opinion and you're defending the criminal. Fine. But you didn't lose one of your city's finest. We did.

Next time your officers need to use a bit more caution.

[ImNewHere]

You are going to be sorely disappointed when this whole case falls apart and the City of Las Vegas is writing a big check to the officer's victim. Because I predict that is *exactly* what will happen.

Watch and see.

Jeny, you're also someone I consider a personal friend.

But you're going to be disappointed. The only check we're going to write is the one that pays for his incarceration. He's a bad guy. And bad things happen to bad people.

[blackcatrun]

Yeah, but your posts sound a lot like the excuses Killian used to make when he was defending the right to get behind the wheel of a car after drinking and use bread as the reason for the positive breathalyzer tests.

And yeah, I am angry. I'm angry that we lost one of our city's finest. Apparently, there isn't a lot of respect for law enforcement in many cities in America. God help the rest of you if you ever need their help.

I have a name use it..implys OPENLY I am not making anyones arguement but my OWN.


Respect is subjective. They do help but are very dictatorship at the same time. Not in our protection as designed..but as oppressers. So your right they have lost a great deal of respect. It's thier problem not ours to repair.

Like some things in this nation we use them...in tolleration only.

It's not a field that holds honer or respect due to it's own actions.

[ImNewHere]

Next time your officers need to use a bit more caution.

This officer was operating within the department policy.

It's the drivers that drink and choose to get behind the wheel that need to change.

[notluzn]

Mustang friend, I know what you're saying but in this case, the Officer made a mistake. One that cost him his life. I'm good friends with a lot of Phoenix Officers and they admit they make mistakes and can get in trouble for it. They have to follow procidures to the T or they could either kill someone or themselves. They have to know when to do things without endangering the public which this LV officer forgot for a moment.

He was probably a great guy and was a great officer but that doesn't mean he didn't mess up. It only takes 1 mess up to cost them a life or two. It was one of those events that it was the right place at the right place at the right time. Things like this happen all the time. I'm glad the Officer hit this truck and not a car with a family in it where he would have killed children. This is how policy are made. Police should never travel 109 mph in a 45 mph zone residential. I know what little reaction time is envolved at those speeds. My Z28 was lighter, faster, able to stop better and everything else over a cop car and at 109 mph it would not beable to stop in time to avoid this accident. You know what the average stoping distance is for a speed of 109 mph? 90 MPH would be about 585 Ft so 109 MPH is about 800-900 ft to stop.You're my brother, and you know that. A Camaro-driving outcast in the family, but still family.

I'm not saying that cops walk on water. I'm not saying they're the chosen people. I think they're largely tools of the New World Order and we will one day live in a Soviet-style nation with them having unlimited power.

I'm saying in this case, the cop was doing his job. He had not been drinking... And the professionalism I've experienced with the police in this city, I have nothing but respect for him.

And if he's responding to a distress call and he's dead because some clown got on the road after drinking, there need to be consequences.

You all have this opinion and you're defending the criminal. Fine. But you didn't lose one of your city's finest. We did.

[ImNewHere]

They do help but are very dictatorship at the same time. Not in our protection as designed..but as oppressers. So your right they have lost a great deal of respect. It's thier problem not ours to repair.


Cop hater.

[notluzn]

This officer was operating within the department policy.

It's the drivers that drink and choose to get behind the wheel that need to change.The officer should have followed common sense like what they actually say in the Briefings.

[notluzn]

109mph = 752 ft average in perfect conditions. There are other varibles that have to be considered but this is the average.

[ImNewHere]

Mustang friend, I know what you're saying but in this case, the Officer made a mistake. One that cost him his life. I'm good friends with a lot of Phoenix Officers and they admit they make mistakes and can get in trouble for it. They have to follow procidures to the T or they could either kill someone or themselves. They have to know when to do things without endangering the public which this LV officer forgot for a moment.

He was probably a great guy and was a great officer but that doesn't mean he didn't mess up. It only takes 1 mess up to cost them a life or two. It was one of those events that it was the right place at the right place at the right time. Things like this happen all the time. I'm glad the Officer hit this truck and not a car with a family in it where he would have killed children. This is how policy are made. Police should never travel 109 mph in a 45 mph zone residential. I know what little reaction time is envolved at those speeds. My Z28 was lighter, faster, able to stop better and everything else over a cop car and at 109 mph it would not beable to stop in time to avoid this accident. You know what the average stoping distance is for a speed of 109 mph? 90 MPH would be about 585 Ft so 109 MPH is about 800-900 ft to stop.

I can't agree with you. He did what he needed to do to get to a domestic violence call. Responding to a call to the best of his ability is not messing up.

He's dead, and he shouldn't be. He did not operate outside the law. He lost his life working to save someone else. And to what? Some guy who got on the road when he shouldn't have?

Jeff, speculate all you want about what would have happened with a family in the car or whatever. But that didn't happen. What happened was we lost a great police officer with a promising career serving the rest of us in our city. And he lost it because someone decided to drink and drive.

[ImNewHere]

The officer should have followed common sense like what they actually say in the Briefings.

I can't speak to the briefings. I wasn't there.

[ImNewHere]

109mph = 752 ft average in perfect conditions. There are other varibles that have to be considered but this is the average.

0.35 > 0.00

[Rhonda]

This officer was operating within the department policy.

It's the drivers that drink and choose to get behind the wheel that need to change.

If going 109mph in a 45mph zone is department policy, that is an extremely illogical policy,
I think department policy helped to hasten this Officers death, that policy maybe needs to be reformed, and updated

[JenyEliza]

Jeny, you're also someone I consider a personal friend.

But you're going to be disappointed. The only check we're going to write is the one that pays for his incarceration. He's a bad guy. And bad things happen to bad people.

I consider you a friend as well, but I don't agree with you or the position you've taken on this--based on the facts that have been presented so far.

You know from past experience how I feel about drunk drivers. I have no love for *anyone* who endangers the lives of innocent people on our roads.

However, *that* is precisely what this officer did with his actions. The person HE HIT happened to have a minute amount of alcohol in his system. Well well below the legal permissible limit. This does *not* mean he was DRUNK. Nor does it mean he was *at fault* for the accident.

NOBODY can move fast enough to get out of the way of a vehicle going 109mph. That's just a fact.

Do you realize how fast the officer was going?

If a QB stood at one end of a football field and threw a football to the other end, the police officer and his car would be there FIRST.

How do you get out of the way of that?? --even with NO alcohol in your system?

Come on.....even you have to realize there is no real way to do that. What was the guy the officer hit supposed to do? He never knew what hit him.....and he was lucky to survive.

[brouski]

Who here thinks they could react to a car coming behind them at 100 mph while stone cold sober?

[chrono807]

At least in Las Vegas, cops have a "Code 3" rule which allows them to decide when it's appropriate to use the lights and when not to. From what I understand, it's a judgment call. He didn't operate as a "rogue cop" on the fringe of professionalism, he did what he needed to do in order to respond to a distress call.

And he did it while sober. Unlike the surviving party of this accident.

We're gonna fry this guy.

The problem with your logic is that you're relying on the officer's judgement. Judgement implies a careful weighing of the costs and benefits of a particular action - or in this case, more specifically, the risks vs. the benefits. 109mph in a residential area carries a significant risk of a serious crash.

Best-case, this would result in a significant delay in the arrival of officers on the scene of the original incident they were called in for (in this case, the report of a domestic disturbance - real or fake is not relevant to the circumstances of the accident). The worst case scenario is what actually happened - a fatal crash. Not to sound insensitive, but that officer is now permanently delayed from responding to the scene of the domestic violence complaint.

Had the officer maintained a reasonable speed and utilized his lights and siren, the accident could have been avoided. The man in the truck the OFFICER rear-ended was an innocent by-stander. His blood-alcohol level is, like the fake nature of the domestic violence complaint, irrelevant to the circumstances of the accident.

So while you may be correct about the "police speed limit" being subject to a case-by-case judgement call, the flaw in your logic is that in this case, the judgement itself was flawed. There's no excuse for traveling 109mph in a 45mph zone IN STEALTH MODE, because the incredibly high probability of a fatal crash in those conditions negates any potential benefit from arriving to the scene a minute sooner. You can't respond at all if you're dead.

Plain and simple, there might not be anything in the rulebooks PROHIBITING driving 109mph, but if you want to use that fact to defend the officer's actions, you need to consider the following: with a BAC of 0.05 at the time of the accident, the truck driver was still 0.03% below the legal limit for a DUI, which means the law states that whether or not he got behind the wheel is completely a judgement call on his own part.

Since the driver of the truck was rear-ended with no advance warning while he was trying to make a left turn, I'd like to raise the argument that there's no evidence to support the claim that he was intoxicated or unable to drive. While this MAY be the case, he was still legally fit to drive, and his fitness to drive is not relevant anyway.

To recap for those of you who don't want to review this whole long-winded post: the officer's speed may have been a matter of judgement, so the speed itself may have been legal, BUT that is only the case if he has his lights and siren on. Even with lights and siren, 109 in a 45 is still poor judgement.

Calling in a fake domestic violence complaint is poor judgement as well, but this incident would have still occurred even if the complaint were real. Getting behind the wheel of a car with a BAC of 0.05% is LEGAL, and may be a bad decision for some but perfectly fine for others, but is not illegal. In this case, however, the BAC is irrelevant because whether the truck driver was shooting heroin behind the wheel or completely straight-edge sober, he could not have gotten out of the way of a 109mph police car in stealth mode.

** EDIT ** This thread grew by two full pages while I wrote that.

And if he's responding to a distress call and he's dead because some clown got on the road after drinking, there need to be consequences.

I'd again like to point out that it's easy to nitpick over a little bit of alcohol consumption, but he was within the legal limit. Please don't try this at home, but think about it - even completely sober, would you be able to see a stealth police car barreling down on you from behind at 109mph in time to get out of its way? The BAC is irrelevant.

[ImNewHere]

If going 109mph in a 45mph zone is department policy, that is an extremely illogical policy,
I think department policy helped to hasten this Officers death, that policy maybe needs to be reformed, and updated

Taking away the option of what a police officer can and can not do when responding to a distress call is a death sentence for the victim. There was one suggestion that the police just drive the speed limit, or just a little more than that.

If I needed a cop, I'd want him there as quickly as possible. I would have wanted that officer to be the one rushing to help me out.

A better policy is for people to not drink and drive.

[brouski]

0.35 > 0.00

So your position is that, while making a legal left turn and a cop car running silent coming 100mph hits him from behind, his BAC is somehow relevant.

[JenyEliza]

Cop hater.

That's uncalled for! :naughty:

Address the facts being discussed, not the poster. Don't stoop to name calling. You're better than that.

[brouski]

You're my brother, and you know that. A Camaro-driving outcast in the family, but still family.

I'm not saying that cops walk on water. I'm not saying they're the chosen people. I think they're largely tools of the New World Order and we will one day live in a Soviet-style nation with them having unlimited power.

I'm saying in this case, the cop was doing his job. He had not been drinking... And the professionalism I've experienced with the police in this city, I have nothing but respect for him.

And if he's responding to a distress call and he's dead because some clown got on the road after drinking, there need to be consequences.

You all have this opinion and you're defending the criminal. Fine. But you didn't lose one of your city's finest. We did.

Not fine enough to dodge traffic at unsafe speeds. Which obviously he thought he could do, being so professional and all.

[notluzn]

Who here thinks they could react to a car coming behind them at 100 mph while stone cold sober?
Not even a NASCAR, Indy or GT series driver!

[notluzn]

0.35 > 0.00 If the cop would have been a better driver he should have missed the guy.:rolleyes:

[JenyEliza]

Who here thinks they could react to a car coming behind them at 100 mph while stone cold sober?

I know I couldn't. No way. Not even on my best day.

[Rhonda]

Taking away the option of what a police officer can and can not do when responding to a distress call is a death sentence for the victim. There was one suggestion that the police just drive the speed limit, or just a little more than that.

If I needed a cop, I'd want him there as quickly as possible. I would have wanted that officer to be the one rushing to help me out.

A better policy is for people to not drink and drive.

I wish people did not drink and drive too, and use cell phones while driving as well..putting on make up fighting with spouse, eating and reading.. ect...good grief they act like they are at home when they drive
I wish to God he had used his siren and lights.

All in all people tend to suck while driving, they are in their own little bubble, which is why lights and sirens are so important

[notluzn]

Ok ImNewHere, If I'm in my Z28 speeding at 175 mph "which is very easy" and a guy in front of me and has a BAC of .045, and I hit him whos fault is it?

[ImNewHere]

The problem with your logic is that you're relying on the officer's judgement.

And you're supporting the driver who was impaired. Yes. He was impaired. Don't go all "defense lawyer" on me and say, "well, it was below the LEGAL limit."

I've already explained it. Go back and read. "Buzzed driving is drunk driving." You don't have to be at 0.08 to be impaired.

Defend the cop killa all you want, but when all is said and done. At the end of the day, your boy is going to fry for our city's loss.[/quote]

Had the officer maintained a reasonable speed and utilized his lights and siren, the accident could have been avoided. The man in the truck the OFFICER rear-ended was an innocent by-stander. His blood-alcohol level is, like the fake nature of the domestic violence complaint, irrelevant to the circumstances of the accident.

Perhaps you'd like to go back a bunch of pages and re-read this thread. If you jump in on page 10, you won't realize we've already covered this.

So while you may be correct about the "police speed limit" being subject to a case-by-case judgement call, the flaw in your logic is that in this case, the judgement itself was flawed. There's no excuse for traveling 109mph in a 45mph zone IN STEALTH MODE, because the incredibly high probability of a fatal crash in those conditions negates any potential benefit from arriving to the scene a minute sooner. You can't respond at all if you're dead

Sorry, Chief. Plain and Simple is just not getting behind the wheel of a car when you've been drinking. If you find that speeding to the scene of a crime has no excuse, then you live in Mayberry and maybe Opie can buy you a rootbeer float or something. :rolleyes:

The cop gave his life trying to save someone. Another guy got on the road after drinking (NOT eating bread or onions or whatever....) And we have an officer who lost his life. Defend the drinker all you want. But it is the fault of the drinking driver.

[chrono807]

If the cop would have been a better driver he should have missed the guy.:rolleyes:

I see what you're saying, but the officer's driving skills aren't even the question here - he exercised extremely poor judgement by driving so far in excess of the speed limit in a populated area. 109mph + no lights + no siren = accident waiting to happen. Someone above mentioned that even a Nascar, Indy or GT driver couldn't have gotten out of that cop's way - I'd like to put forth the argument that even a Nascar, Indy, or GT driver IN THEIR OWN CAR couldn't have avoided that truck at those speeds. At 109mph, even if the police car's headlights were on, the officer was FAR Exceeding their effective distance.

Unless someone can prove that the truck driver's taillights were off and brake lights were malfunctioning, I'm forced to conclude that he's completely an innocent bystander, and the thing about innocent bystanders is that it doesn't matter if they're sober, drunk, or injecting their bodies with horse tranquilizers - all they have to do is sit there and get hit. The only individual who could have DIRECTLY prevented this tragic turn of events is the officer. He could have driven at a safer speed, used his lights and siren, or both, but driving that speed in that neighborhood at night was a recipe for disaster.

[ImNewHere]

Ok ImNewHere, If I'm in my Z28 speeding at 175 mph "which is very easy" and a guy in front of me and has a BAC of .045, and I hit him whos fault is it?

Another fantasy. A Z28 can only go that fast if it's going downhill for several miles.

Irrelevant.

[ImNewHere]

So your position is that, while making a legal left turn and a cop car running silent coming 100mph hits him from behind, his BAC is somehow relevant.

And your position is that drinking and driving should be OK.

[ImNewHere]

That's uncalled for! :naughty:

Address the facts being discussed, not the poster. Don't stoop to name calling. You're better than that.

I am.

But Jeny, you're the one that wanted to dismiss the Vegas cops being "as corrupt" as the Atlanta cops. I can't speak for the police force in Atlanta, but I'd put the ones in Vegas under as much scrutiny as you want and you won't find a thing.

If you have a problem with the cops where you live, then you should take care of the ones there, not try to smear the ones here.

[chrono807]

And you're supporting the driver who was impaired. Yes. He was impaired. Don't go all "defense lawyer" on me and say, "well, it was below the LEGAL limit."

I've already explained it. Go back and read. "Buzzed driving is drunk driving." You don't have to be at 0.08 to be impaired.

Defend the cop killa all you want, but when all is said and done. At the end of the day, your boy is going to fry for our city's loss.

Perhaps you'd like to go back a bunch of pages and re-read this thread. If you jump in on page 10, you won't realize we've already covered this.



Sorry, Chief. Plain and Simple is just not getting behind the wheel of a car when you've been drinking. If you find that speeding to the scene of a crime has no excuse, then you live in Mayberry and maybe Opie can buy you a rootbeer float or something. :rolleyes:

The cop gave his life trying to save someone. Another guy got on the road after drinking (NOT eating bread or onions or whatever....) And we have an officer who lost his life. Defend the drinker all you want. But it is the fault of the drinking driver.

I don't appreciate the personal attacks, and was simply trying to express my disagreement with your position. But whatever, I'll take the bait - by your logic, if a drug addict were to go overboard and consume a lethal dose of his drug of choice, and somebody accidentally shoots him meaning to shoot someone else, it's the addict's own fault because hey, he was going to die anyway? That's quite possibly the most ridiculous logic I've ever heard.

Is the wife who sleeps around on her husband innocent simply because he didn't buy her the jewelry she wanted for her birthday? There are a whole bunch of analogies that could point out the ridiculous nature of your logic.

I UNDERSTAND that you'd rather have a police officer responding sooner than later, but you really need to consider the fact that this officer will NEVER respond to that call because he's now DEAD, and there were a few simple things he could have done to prevent his own death. Your argument that "the truck shouldn't have been in his way" is a load of bull - it's a public roadway and he was operating a vehicle legally when he got rear-ended by one of Vegas's finest.

That's why the hot-shot cop routine is crap. What good are you to a victim if you die on your way to the scene? Slow the hell down, you're no good to the city if you're dead. Cops don't own the roads, and by defending an officer who couldn't be bothered to keep his adrenaline in check and flick a couple of toggle switches on his dashboard, you're proving that you think they do own the road and simply allow us the privilege of sharing it.

[blackcatrun]

Cop hater.

Now, now stop trying to tell me what I hate and dont hate.

The postion taken isnt one for a reflective counter, then the only thing to do is walk away in disagreement.

How ever it's not far off the concluded results of the human condition being suffered at this point has results in a decaying social climate.

In trying to prevent futher decline those suited and sworn to protect us fail in efforts and have resorted by law to invading the privetcy of the citizens of this nation.

It means that people have lost faith in the ability of the authority to protect when the authoritys act as oppressers.

It has nothing to do with hate.

Please correct this mistake.

[chrono807]

Another fantasy. A Z28 can only go that fast if it's going downhill for several miles.

Irrelevant.

I wasn't even going to bother because I don't feel like having to deal with your personal attacks anymore, but I have to jump in here. It's NOT a fantasy. Replace 175mph with any arbitrary number.

If I'm going over the speed limit and I rear-end you, whose fault is it? That's not a fantasy, it happens on a daily basis and guess what - many states AUTOMATICALLY find that the fault lies with the person who rear-ended the other, EVEN IF THE PERSON IN FRONT SLAMMED ON THEIR BRAKES INTENTIONALLY. It's YOUR responsibility to not hit people in front of you. Your officer FAILED, and it sucks that an officer had to die but MAYBE the rest of your officers will learn from his mistake and you won't have to lose any more!

[JenyEliza]

INH---why are you ignoring the fact that the OFFICER endangered EVERY OTHER INNOCENT LIFE he encountered while traveling at 109mph in a residential area?

What if there had been pedestrians he hit? What if he'd hit a car parked on the street? This is just as likely as him hitting someone turning left at an intersection who happened to have had a beer before he got in the car.

Would you still take the same position?

[notluzn]

Well Im done here. May the Cop RIP and God bless his family. Give the Guy a new truck and call it a day.

[Rhonda]

Has anyone here ever said "If only" this or that, when losing a close friend or loved one? We all as humans have a tendency to want to lay blame in a time of great loss, it is a part of grief. I think the Officers death hits very close to home, a reminder of the many sacrifices made in the line of duty.

[ImNewHere]

I wasn't even going to bother because I don't feel like having to deal with your personal attacks anymore,

Personal attacks? Point out one TOS violation and I'll remove it.

You're in an indefensible position and you have to resort to deflection in order to make your point.

Cop - dead. And shouldn't be.

Driver - drank and on road - shouldn't happen. EVER!

I have a right to know that the other drivers on the road are sober.

Those are the facts of the case. Spin it any way you want, your boy is going down.

[chrono807]

INH---why are you ignoring the fact that the OFFICER endangered EVERY OTHER INNOCENT LIFE he encountered while traveling at 109mph in a residential area?

What if there had been pedestrians he hit? What if he'd hit a car parked on the street? This is just as likely as him hitting someone turning left at an intersection who happened to have had a beer before he got in the car.

Would you still take the same position?

Very true - I didn't even think of those analogies in my prior post. To reiterate - if you run into something due to your own poor judgement, it's your own fault.

Even a tree works here. If the cop had lost control of the car and spun off the road into a tree, would INH be blaming the homeowner and saying they shouldn't have planted a tree? And God forbid somebody find out that the homeowner was tipping back a few with his friends on his own property while he planted the tree 10 years ago - he's clearly a raving drunk who murdered the perfect officer.

[chrono807]

Personal attacks? Point out one TOS violation and I'll remove it.

You're in an indefensible position and you have to resort to deflection in order to make your point.

Perhaps "attacks" was the incorrect word - I've never been to Mayberry so I don't know if that's an insult or a compliment. I let the discussion get to my head and for that I apologize.

Unfortunately for this situation, however, my position is entirely defensible, both by sheer logic and the letter of the law, and regardless of what you may think, I myself actually do not drink, or even smoke. I'm not defending the drinker, I'm defending the innocent bystander who happened to have consumed a small amount of alcohol. Unless you (the generic "you" meaning anybody) can show me that the pickup's rear warning lights were malfunctioning or not turned on, there is nothing the truck driver could have done to prevent this. The police car was running stealth - the officer had a chance to see the truck he was about to hit. The driver of the truck never even saw the cop coming.

I have a right to know that the other drivers on the road are sober.

I agree - but the thing you're forgetting is that his BAC was within the legal limit. 0.035% when he was tested after the accident, so let's say 0.05% (high estimate) at the time of the accident - of 0.05 was an unsafe number THE LAWS WOULDN'T ALLOW IT!

[BROEDERBOND]

..............
......Driver - drank and on road - shouldn't happen. EVER!

Cop drove like a criminal out of control Fool. Should not happen EVER!


..I have a right to know that the other drivers on the road are sober........

The rest of us have a Right to be free of endangerment by reckless cops.


............. Spin it any way you want, your boy is going down.

Perhaps if the Courts are corrupt enough to suit your tastes of your ilk.

[JenyEliza]

What would happen to an average citizen who drove 109mph in a 45 mph residential zone? What would happen to that driver if he hit a truck turning left FROM BEHIND and the truck driver had a BAC the same as Darling's?

Presuming everyone survived, would charges be laid? Against whom? And why?

[chrono807]

What would happen to an average citizen who drove 109mph in a 45 mph residential zone? What would happen to that driver if he hit a truck turning left FROM BEHIND and the truck driver had a BAC the same as Darling's?

Presuming everyone survived, would charges be laid? Against whom? And why?

In New York, fault would automatically be assigned to the driver in the rear, i.e. the one who did the rear-ending. I know this for a fact - I was the rear driver in such an accident. The person in front of me slammed on their brakes, and for that reason I tried to fight it, but when I tried getting a lawyer, more than one told me that in New York, it doesn't matter if they have a giant sign on the back of their car that says "Hit Me", if you DO hit them, it's automatically your fault.

[I am the Eggman]

What would happen to an average citizen who drove 109mph in a 45 mph residential zone? What would happen to that driver if he hit a truck turning left FROM BEHIND and the truck driver had a BAC the same as Darling's?

Presuming everyone survived, would charges be laid? Against whom? And why?

There you go using logic and common sense. Can't have that, can we. Not when there's so much cowbell around.

[blackcatrun]

Personal attacks? Point out one TOS violation and I'll remove it.

You're in an indefensible position and you have to resort to deflection in order to make your point.

Cop - dead. And shouldn't be.

Driver - drank and on road - shouldn't happen. EVER!

I have a right to know that the other drivers on the road are sober.

Those are the facts of the case. Spin it any way you want, your boy is going down.


Your arguement has a open flaw to which you profess.
If the officer was going at resoanble speed he would have been around to argue the point {survived the collishion}. As it stands he was not and results is an officer perished in direct results of high speed and inability of other driver{s} to know the officer was on a call to remove themselves from harms way.

Had a emergancy signal been able to warn this would not be a topic and your officer very much alive to have completed the call being responded to.

[JenyEliza]

In New York, fault would automatically be assigned to the driver in the rear, i.e. the one who did the rear-ending. I know this for a fact - I was the rear driver in such an accident. The person in front of me slammed on their brakes, and for that reason I tried to fight it, but when I tried getting a lawyer, more than one told me that in New York, it doesn't matter if they have a giant sign on the back of their car that says "Hit Me", if you DO hit them, it's automatically your fault.

The same here in GA. In fact, if you rear-end someone here you can (almost) be guaranteed to be charged with other related charges:

Following too closely
Speeding
Speeding more than 20 mph over speed limit
Reckless driving
Failure to maintain control
Failure to maintain lane
Failure to yield
Driving too fast for conditions
Vehicular manslaughter (in the case of a fatality as a result of the rear-end smash)
Yada yada yada

And...I could go on. I think you get the idea.

[brouski]

And your position is that drinking and driving should be OK.

No one in the situation was impaired. The legal limit is probably too low as it is, and the pickup driver was still under it.

But you know that, as it's been pointed out to you several times.

[brouski]

Personal attacks? Point out one TOS violation and I'll remove it.

You're in an indefensible position and you have to resort to deflection in order to make your point.

Cop - dead. And shouldn't be.

Driver - drank and on road - shouldn't happen. EVER!

I have a right to know that the other drivers on the road are sober.

Those are the facts of the case. Spin it any way you want, your boy is going down.

You might rethink your response to blackcatrun a few pages ago

[johnrocks]

In New York, fault would automatically be assigned to the driver in the rear, i.e. the one who did the rear-ending. I know this for a fact - I was the rear driver in such an accident. The person in front of me slammed on their brakes, and for that reason I tried to fight it, but when I tried getting a lawyer, more than one told me that in New York, it doesn't matter if they have a giant sign on the back of their car that says "Hit Me", if you DO hit them, it's automatically your fault.

Here in Louisiana too.

[jimjames418]

Here in Louisiana too.
Michigan is the same. You hit someone from the rear, your fault, break out the check book and start writing. :doh:

[Talk2Bill]

I still do not see how it was the truck drives fault at all. Cops are human, humans do not always show good judgment. And I have to say that there is no reason to go 25 miles over the posted speed limit much less 60 over.

[notluzn]

I still do not see how it was the truck drives fault at all. Cops are human, humans do not always show good judgment. And I have to say that there is no reason to go 25 miles over the posted speed limit much less 60 over.People pick the wrong sides every now and then :))

[terri910]

If there is a reason to go that fast, then lights/siren should be used.


I don't get it, really. I've seen lights/sirens going when the police/emergency vehicle isn't even going that fast. I'd like for one of the police officers that post here to explain why a police officer wouldn't use them, going that fast.

That whole "you haven't earned the right to know" thing that was in that other thread doesn't really cut it with me.

[JenyEliza]

I still do not see how it was the truck drives fault at all. Cops are human, humans do not always show good judgment. And I have to say that there is no reason to go 25 miles over the posted speed limit much less 60 over.

Exactly.

[Talk2Bill]

People pick the wrong sides every now and then :))

I think people that like and respect the great men and women that are cops, have a hard time wanting to blame one for 'doing their job.' I almost always support the officer, but in this case, if not for a beer or two their would have been no question. The truck driver (and it is not clear in the story) if he was rear ended or hit as he crossed in front of the officer...would have not been hit if the officer had been driving at a reasonable speed.

if we think of the cop as just some guy that was speeding then would anyone STILL think the truck driver caused the accident?

[Talk2Bill]

Exactly.

oh and not that it counts for much but I was an Army MP for 4 years. i have been in a few high speed chases. (a suspected kidnapping and E2 with a new crotch rocket to name two. And even then 109 MPH would have been out of the question. much less for a domestic.

[terri910]

I think people that like and respect the great men and women that are cops, have a hard time wanting to blame one for 'doing their job.'
I used to be like that until FidelisAdMortem disabused me of that, letting me know how stupid I was for thinking like that. Respect is reserved for the great men and women that are cops that their their job well.


I'm still waiting for someone to explain how this officer NOT using his lights/siren was him doing his job "well."

[JenyEliza]

oh and not that it counts for much but I was an Army MP for 4 years. i have been in a few high speed chases. (a suspected kidnapping and E2 with a new crotch rocket to name two. And even then 109 MPH would have been out of the question. much less for a domestic.

It counts for plenty. Thank you for your service--and for your candid comments.

I hate that a police officer lost his life in this case. It's sad. It's tragic for his children, but the facts are the facts.

He did not use proper care or follow even the most reasonable safety procedures (ie, buckling up or using lights/siren) while en route to the "domestic dispute" at a rate of speed that was disproportionate to getting his job done.

Was 109 mph in a 45 mph *residential zone* a reasonable speed for the call at hand? Let's be honest with ourselves.

I don't think it is.

Even if he had been responding to a "burglary in progress" and stood a chance of catching bank robbers who were threatening the lives of the public and the bank employees, that would have been too fast for conditions. Nevermind traveling at this rate of speed in a NEIGHBORHOOD with *no lights or siren*.

All of those ingredients were a recipe for disaster--and the person who cooked up the witches brew was the police office who made the disatrous decisions that ultimately lead to his death.

As sad as it is, this is the truth.

[JenyEliza]

I think people that like and respect the great men and women that are cops, have a hard time wanting to blame one for 'doing their job.' I almost always support the officer, but in this case, if not for a beer or two their would have been no question. The truck driver (and it is not clear in the story) if he was rear ended or hit as he crossed in front of the officer...would have not been hit if the officer had been driving at a reasonable speed.

if we think of the cop as just some guy that was speeding then would anyone STILL think the truck driver caused the accident?

Which goes back to the questions I asked earlier:


What would happen to an average citizen who drove 109mph in a 45 mph residential zone? What would happen to that driver if he hit a truck turning left FROM BEHIND and the truck driver had a BAC the same as Darling's?

Presuming everyone survived, would charges be laid? Against whom? And why?

[OldSchoolConservative]

I did not read through this whole thread butt he reality of the matter is that any cop who speeds at 109 mph without sirens or lights on is basically violating the civil rights of every citizen on the road because logically the cop and his car have become a weapon against every one else on the road. As others have said sober or not one just does not have time to react to anyone traveling 109 mph. And franjly I think any cop that plows into someone that fast especially without lights on needs to become the newest member of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons.

[terri910]

And franjly I think any cop that plows into someone that fast especially without lights on needs to become the newest member of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons.
This one became the newest name in the obituary column, unfortunately.

[OldSchoolConservative]

Whether the guy was drunk or not is besides the point. The fact is that even if the driver were sober that the cop going that fast is still going to hit the car 99.999999999% of the time. Humans do not have Jedi reflexes even when perfectly alert and sober. The fact is that cop turned his vehicle into basically a weapon on the road with potential to cause catastrophe and unfortunatley someone did lose their life in this case the cop. As a science major there is a huge and I mean huge difference in crashing into someone at 109 mph than even 75 mph. It is called the law of momentum.

[chrono807]

Whether the guy was drunk or not is besides the point. The fact is that even if the driver were sober that the cop going that fast is still going to hit the car 99.999999999% of the time. Humans do not have Jedi reflexes even when perfectly alert and sober. The fact is that cop turned his vehicle into basically a weapon on the road with potential to cause catastrophe and unfortunatley someone did lose their life in this case the cop. As a science major there is a huge and I mean huge difference in crashing into someone at 109 mph than even 75 mph. It is called the law of momentum.

Good point, since kinetic energy rises proportionally to the square of the velocity.

Crown Victoria @ 60mph (which I'd consider the upper limit for a 45mph residential area) = 652666 joules
Crown Victoria @ 109mph = 2153979 joules (3.3x the amount of kinetic energy that needed to be absorbed by both vehicles - and let's face it most body-on-frame trucks don't have much give to them in a crash and the Crown Vic is a 30+ year old platform, so the deceleration time due to the impact was much shorter than, say, an Impala rear-ending a minivan).

[JenyEliza]

I used to be like that until FidelisAdMortem disabused me of that, letting me know how stupid I was for thinking like that. Respect is reserved for the great men and women that are cops that their their job well.


I'm still waiting for someone to explain how this officer NOT using his lights/siren was him doing his job "well."

Donchya know the general public doesn't have the right to know or even ask this?? We aren't entitled to any knowledge (elite) police officers don't wish to share.

The public just gets to pay their salaries, provide excellent benefits to them and their families (benies that many citizens don't have, including the many good folks currently out of work).

In return, the touch-me-not officers abuse the public --at *their * discretion, whether or not such abuse is merited.

According to some so-called "Civil Servant" police officers, you had best sit back, keep your mouth shut and stop asking so many questions.

You know better. :naughty:

/end cynicsim

[terri910]

According to some so-called "Civil Servant" police officers, you had best sit back, keep your mouth shut and stop asking so many questions.

It is nice to know (because I live in a small town and happen to know them) that not all are like that. But some definitely are.

I do not, now, make the mistake of giving LEO's the "benefit of the doubt" because of the work they do, and I owe that all to FAM.

[stodr]

I also live in vegas. I give alot of credit to the sheriff for comming out with the facts. I agree with somebody else that had said the girl needs to be charged. I also believe I would charge the cop that was trailing the incident who claimed the witnesses were wrong and the cop did have his lights on (if in fact that did happen it was reported as so).

This happened last night again, luckly nobody was killed this time.

[JenyEliza]

It is nice to know (because I live in a small town and happen to know them) that not all are like that. But some definitely are.

I know that *most * LEOs are on the force to protect and serve. But I would never say that all of them are. It's a shame, though, that we don't know which is which when we encounter them.

I do not, now, make the mistake of giving LEO's the "benefit of the doubt" because of the work they do, and I owe that all to FAM.

FAM has only reinforced my distrust for the boys in blue.

My mother is an ER nurse. When I was in my 20's (I'm mid-40's now), she warned me not to date police officers.

She said she had encountered more than one control freak/power tripping cop who was abusive to their spouse or girlfriend--badly enough to land these women in her ER. She said cops will cover for one another if something like this happens, and she's seen them cooking up their story with their buds in the ER. She's seen them get away with murder (literally) and that the absolute *worst* place a woman can be is married to or the girlfriend of a cop. I don't date cops. Never will.

I have seen (with my own eyes) misbehavior on the part of cops here in my part of the world. I don't know about any other part of the country, but it happens here. It's sad. It's disgusting and shameful, but it is a fact. There are BAD cops.

I don't hold *all* cops responsible for the few bad ones. I know they're NOT ALL BAD, but I certainly do have a distrust of the police officers I encounter until I have been able to ascertain whether they are dirty or not.

I distrust them exactly the same way they mistrust everyone they encounter. I treat them with caution and make absolutely NO assumption that they are good and mean me no harm, until they demonstrate such.

FAM simply reinforces my need to take this stance personally.

[JenyEliza]

I also live in vegas. I give alot of credit to the sheriff for comming out with the facts. I agree with somebody else that had said the girl needs to be charged. I also believe I would charge the cop that was trailing the incident who claimed the witnesses were wrong and the cop did have his lights on (if in fact that did happen it was reported as so).

This happened last night again, luckly nobody was killed this time.

The domestic violence call is actually rather irrelavant to this situation. There was NO need for this police officer to drive at 109 mph (which was demonstrated by electronic equipment on board the cruiser, as well as skid mark calculations which confirmed his speed), in a RESIDENTIAL area posted at 45 mph. Especially without lights and siren.

This is the SOLE FAULT of the officer.

The secondary officers are not being considered for disciplinary action, although, I believe they should be as their behavior smacks of a cover up and frame up of the man who was HIT FROM BEHIND. At minimum, there should be a full investigation of their actions before closing this case.


Gillespie said that when he addressed the media many hours after the accident, he had been given incorrect information by first responders to the crash. They said Manor and the second officer had their lights and sirens on.

"They were there right after it, and they thought that that's what they were told," the sheriff said. "And we didn't interview the secondary officer right away because it was a very traumatic event."

The department will review and change how it collects and releases information after fatal accidents involving officers, Gillespie said. He said the department wasn't considering disciplinary action against those officers who relayed the information.

The accident was "traumatic" for the officers who weren't involved, but it wasn't "traumatic" to the man the officer rear-ended? They expected HIM to walk a straight line and touch his finger to his nose after being hit at 109 mph? It's amazing his head was still attached to his shoulders, and not knocked off by the force of the crash. And yet the cops said he "failed" the field sobriety test????? BS.

Check his BAC stats:

The sheriff also maintained that Darling's arrest for driving under the influence was valid. It wasn't yet known whether Darling was indeed under the influence.

"He told the officers he had been drinking, and he failed a DUI field test," Gillespie said.

A little over an hour after the accident, a blood test showed Darling had a blood-alcohol level of 0.035, well below the legal limit of 0.08. A second test an hour later showed his level had dropped to 0.021.

Clark County District Attorney David Roger declined to comment through his secretary because his office had not yet received the case. Darling's first court appearance is scheduled for June 8.


Investigators determined Manor's speed through electronics in the vehicle and with separate calculations made by a fatal crash investigator, Gillespie said. Detectives determined that his police lights were off through an investigation of the bulbs.

[CMike11]

I have a different question to bring up.

I understand the need for a police officer to go at warp 9 if there is an intruder or someone in imminent danger.

But is it really necessary to go at such dangerous speeds in a residential area for a domestic violence call?

The way I understood it the girl claimed that the father struck the mother.

[JenyEliza]

Further to your question, Mike--

Why would a police officer think it was appropriate to travel at 109 mph in a residential area?

Why would a police officer think it was appropriate to travel at 109 mph in a residential area with no lights, no siren?

Would the officer not realize there is a risk of a) hitting pedestrians b) hitting parked cars c) otherwise wrecking and harming innocent bystanders?

Anyone?

[Cav Scout]

This officer was an idiot.

[WhiteHatBobby]

The black box will be retrieved to see this situation.

[JenyEliza]

The black box will be retrieved to see this situation.

The black box already *has* been retrieved. From the article:

http://www.lvrj.com/news/45619762.html

Investigators determined Manor's speed through electronics in the vehicle and with separate calculations made by a fatal crash investigator, Gillespie said. Detectives determined that his police lights were off through an investigation of the bulbs.

[trojan8402]

Cops do whatever they want. I hate the police in general in small towns and rural areas. They are the judge and jury whenever it comes to doing whatever they want and whatever they claim was right.

[OldSchoolConservative]

109 mph is dangerous enough on the interstate in many ways but 109 mph in a 45 mph residential zone is unbelievable. Unless there was a credible and instant clear threat that someones life may have been in immediate danger than 109 mph was wrong.

[Broseph]

Further to your question, Mike--

Why would a police officer think it was appropriate to travel at 109 mph in a residential area?

Why would a police officer think it was appropriate to travel at 109 mph in a residential area with no lights, no siren?

Would the officer not realize there is a risk of a) hitting pedestrians b) hitting parked cars c) otherwise wrecking and harming innocent bystanders?

Anyone?

The answer to all of your questions lies in the standard set by district attorneys, judges and police chiefs. The consequences for an action such as that undertaken by an ordinary citizen would be swift and harsh. On the other hand, as our legal system (I refuse to use the phrase 'justice system' as justice is rarely handed out) has shown time and time again, when law enforcement undertakes the very same acts, they have any number of ways out.

1) Cover up from their fellow frat members who refuse to cross the 'blue line'.
2) Chiefs who call it an 'isolated incident' and an 'accident' while playing up how many awards, credentials, etc. the officer has and saying how loved he is by everyone to build public sympathy.
3) District attorneys either refusing to believe that the officer actually is deserving of any justice or flat out covering for them.
4) Judges that give out lenient sentences.

As you mentioned previously, the Kathryn Johnston case which ended up having the entire Narc division in the Atlanta PD canned. If I shot someone based on an informant's tip, handcuffed said bleeding person to a piece of furniture while allowing them to die, planted evidence, lied on warrants and then lied to the FBI, do you think I would have received 5, 8 or 10 years in prison? (as the main officers who were involved did)

[JenyEliza]

The answer to all of your questions lies in the standard set by district attorneys, judges and police chiefs. The consequences for an action such as that undertaken by an ordinary citizen would be swift and harsh. On the other hand, as our legal system (I refuse to use the phrase 'justice system' as justice is rarely handed out) has shown time and time again, when law enforcement undertakes the very same acts, they have any number of ways out.

1) Cover up from their fellow frat members who refuse to cross the 'blue line'.
2) Chiefs who call it an 'isolated incident' and an 'accident' while playing up how many awards, credentials, etc. the officer has and saying how loved he is by everyone to build public sympathy.
3) District attorneys either refusing to believe that the officer actually is deserving of any justice or flat out covering for them.
4) Judges that give out lenient sentences.

As you mentioned previously, the Kathryn Johnston case which ended up having the entire Narc division in the Atlanta PD canned. If I shot someone based on an informant's tip, handcuffed said bleeding person to a piece of furniture while allowing them to die, planted evidence, lied on warrants and then lied to the FBI, do you think I would have received 5, 8 or 10 years in prison? (as the main officers who were involved did)

In short, no. Had you taken those actions, you would have received life in prison without parole--as a minimum. I would not rule out the DP, as GA is a death penalty state.

It (appears) that there are two standards of conduct in our society. One for the elites (cops, judges, politicians, government employees, etc) and one for "common citizens".

This is NOT why America was founded. Our forefathers came to America to escape such tyranny.

WHY have we allowed this double-standard to develop? Why do we allow it to continue to exist?

[OldSchoolConservative]

I know that a lot of you are leary about the feds and feds enacting more laws but I think this is one type of instance where Congress needs to legislate a uniform standard. That way you do not have to worry about what the local sheriffs, DA or judges discretions are concerning this type of matter. I understand that each case is different and each call situation specific but there comes a common sense and logical refrain that doing 109 mph in a 45 without sirens is basically a deadly weapon that has huge risks of harming innocents.

[JenyEliza]

This is what was left of the officer's patrol car:

http://media.lvrj.com/images/3546673.jpg

That's what happens to ANY vehicle driving 109mph and it hits another inanimate object.

He could have hit a tree. He could have hit a utility pole. He could have hit a parked car. Even worse, he could have hit innocent pedestrians. The result would still be the same. Fatal injuries.

It is absolutely AMAZING that Mr. Darling survived being HIT BY THE OFFICER.

Blame rests solely with the officer who made the deadly choice to drive his patrol car 109 mph in a residential area with a 45 mph speed limit.

[JenyEliza]

This is what was left of the officer's patrol car:

http://media.lvrj.com/images/3546673.jpg

That's what happens to ANY vehicle driving 109mph and it hits another inanimate object.

He could have hit a tree. He could have hit a utility pole. He could have hit a parked car. Even worse, he could have hit innocent pedestrians. The result would still be the same. Fatal injuries.

It is absolutely AMAZING that Mr. Darling survived being HIT BY THE OFFICER.

Blame rests solely with the officer who made the deadly choice to drive his patrol car 109 mph in a residential area with a 45 mph speed limit.


"The facts that we have I think certainly change the charges that are there," a stern Gillespie said in an afternoon news conference. "We do believe his speed was a significant factor in what took place in this accident. So yes, we are looking at those original charges."
Sheriff Doug Gillespie

Does anyone dispute the Sherrif's conclusion that the officer's excessive speed was a SIGNFICANT FACTOR resulting in his death?

Does anyone dispute that controlling a vehicle going 109 mph in a residential area is not wise, and makes it difficult to control the vehicle?

Does anyone dispute Officer Manor could have hit a parked car, a tree, a pedestrian, rather than Mr. Darling's pick up?

Anyone?

[SFC(R)L]

tragic.

[JenyEliza]

tragic.

It certainly is. For all involved. Including the man who was wrongly arrested and charged with the accident.

A copy of his falsified arrest warrant:
http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

The Sheriff says:

http://www.lvrj.com/news/45619762.html

Gillespie called Manor's speed in the 45-mph zone on Flamingo Road "excessive and unsafe," even if his lights and siren had been on. The facts of the accident probably will alter the charges Darling faces, the sheriff said.

"The facts that we have I think certainly change the charges that are there," a stern Gillespie said in an afternoon news conference. "We do believe his speed was a significant factor in what took place in this accident. So yes, we are looking at those original charges."

[SFC(R)L]

Recommend all charges be dropped.

[JenyEliza]

Recommend all charges be dropped.

As do I. Clearly he was not at fault for this preventable, tragic accident. There were no lights or siren to warn him of the approach of the emergency vehicles.

Additionally, by Nevada state law, his BAC was well under the legal limit of 0.08 was not DUI or impaired. Thus, I predict the DUI causing death charge will not stand either.

Based on comments posted by Las Vegans at numerous forums I found during my search on the internet, Mr. Darling has the overwhelming support of the citizens of Las Vegas.

Sherriff Gillespie has his hands full with this one. He walks a tightrope, trying to support his officers, while dealing with the public expectation that the LVMPD polices its own and is transparent and accountable. He is in a very unenviable position right now.

But then again, so is Mr. Darling -- his vehicle was totaled by Officer Manor, he has physical injuries, as well as emotional and he has spent time in jail without due cause. He's also facing serious charges and has had to go to the time and expense of hiring an attorney to protect him and his rights.

All because one officer decided he was above the law. From what I have ascertained, it appears Manor (1st responder) and the 2nd responder vehicles were racing to the domestic dispute. *That* is why he was going 109 mph in a 45 mph residential area.

His fatcatting cost him his life, and his buddies in blue tried to pin it on the innocent man he hit.

Even his boss said:

Gillespie called Manor's speed in the 45-mph zone on Flamingo Road "excessive and unsafe," even if his lights and siren had been on.

[Broseph]

Sherriff Gillespie has his hands full with this one. He walks a tightrope, trying to support his officers, while dealing with the public expectation that the LVMPD polices its one and is transparent and accountable. He is in a very unenviable position right now.

The position is only unenviable because even suggesting that another cop may be in the wrong simply is not in the programming of the average law enforcement officer. Gillespie is no different.

I keep on waiting to read in the paper about when a teacher abuses a student or a doctor abuses a patient and then all of the other teachers and doctors come out in support of their fellow employee while looking selfishly moronic instead of distancing themselves from the person.

[jimjames418]

The position is only unenviable because even suggesting that another cop may be in the wrong simply is not in the programming of the average law enforcement officer. Gillespie is no different.

I keep on waiting to read in the paper about when a teacher abuses a student or a doctor abuses a patient and then all of the other teachers and doctors come out in support of their fellow employee while looking selfishly moronic instead of distancing themselves from the person.
Will never happen. It is too ingrained in the men in blue to cover for each other. Why do you think the death of Drew Peterson's first wife was not investigated as a murder instead of an accident? It was because he was a cop, plain and simple.

[JenyEliza]

Will never happen. It is too ingrained in the men in blue to cover for each other. Why do you think the death of Drew Peterson's first wife was not investigated as a murder instead of an accident? It was because he was a cop, plain and simple.

NO!!!! Say it ain't so! :doh: :whistle: ;)

[sgtmac_46]

It certainly is. For all involved. Including the man who was wrongly arrested and charged with the accident.

A copy of his falsified arrest warrant:
http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/darling_arrest.pdf

The Sheriff says:

http://www.lvrj.com/news/45619762.html


I guess i'll get accused of defending driving with no lights or sirens by pointing out, once again, that what you are calling 'an arrest warrant' is NOT an arrest warrant......it's an arrest REPORT! Warrants are issued by Judges.

[sgtmac_46]

The position is only unenviable because even suggesting that another cop may be in the wrong simply is not in the programming of the average law enforcement officer. Gillespie is no different.

I keep on waiting to read in the paper about when a teacher abuses a student or a doctor abuses a patient and then all of the other teachers and doctors come out in support of their fellow employee while looking selfishly moronic instead of distancing themselves from the person.

Uhm......Doctors kill tens of thousands of patients each year.......how many other doctors bury those patients without outing their own? MOST OF THEM!



What we should REALLY do is turn on each other like a raving pack of jackals every time someone clown even MAKES an allegation, just like some of YOU folks........just run around like DRAMA queens screaming about how all of us are CORRUPT STOOGES of the state out to brutalize you........that's what you want, isn't it?

Based on my 14 years experience of being on the receiving end of WEEKLY false allegations by members of the public for doing my job, many of those allegations of the most amusing and absurd kind, yeah.......i'm gonna give a cop the benefit of the doubt.......sorry you have a problem with that.......but it's been MY experience that 99 times out of 100, when someone makes an allegation against the police THEY are lying, not the police..........sure, we need to catch that ONE TIME out of a hundred, but that doesn't mean we flip it upside down and CRUCIFY 99 innocent cops to get that one bad apple.

[sgtmac_46]

Will never happen. It is too ingrained in the men in blue to cover for each other. Why do you think the death of Drew Peterson's first wife was not investigated as a murder instead of an accident? It was because he was a cop, plain and simple.

Heck, he probably paid another cop to do it.......that's the way cops are.......we call kill each others wives when our buddies want us too.......that is when we're not sitting around trying to figure out new ways of violating YOUR rights. ;)

[JenyEliza]

This officer was an idiot.

He's now a dead idiot and an innocent man has a FELONY arrest for DUI causing death on his record.

In spite of what others have posted here (and elsewhere) the charges filed against Mr. Darling have NOT been dropped. They are being *reviewed*, with a court date of June 8 still firmly in place.

The Sheriff has stated that he intends to continue with the felony DUI charge, but the "Failure to Yield to an Emergency Vehicle" is likely to be dropped, in light of the new information that no lights or siren were in use at the time of the "accident".


Police say Calvin Darling's blood alcohol level was less than half the legal limit the morning of the crash. In order to be held liable in a felony DUI case causing death or substantial bodily harm, prosecutors would have to prove that Darling was at fault in the crash.

"Metro policy states," says Sheriff Doug Gillespie, "if an officer chooses not to use lights and sirens, he must obey all traffic laws. The speed limit in that area is 45 miles per hour."

So the onus is on the officer, one would think--right?

Not.


And now, we've learned that Metro Officer James Manor did not have his lights and siren on while driving over 100 miles per hour down Flamingo Road.

28-year-old Manor collided with a truck being driven by 45-year-old Calving Darling. Darling survived the crash; Officer Manor did not.

Mr. Darling has had to hire an attorney ($$), and has been put through the mill physically, emotionally and financially because of the actions of the now dead Officer.

He still stands to spend many years in prison for the FELONY DUI. This nightmare continues for him and his family.

[jimjames418]

Heck, he probably paid another cop to do it.......that's the way cops are.......we call kill each others wives when our buddies want us too.......that is when we're not sitting around trying to figure out new ways of violating YOUR rights. ;)
Sgt,
It is nothing to make light of. It may have something to do with all the stories about police officers being convicted of various crimes that we read on a daily basis. These are convictions, not charges. And is from the first page of a google search for "police officer convicted", which returned more than 27,900 hits.

Maywood police officer sentenced for assaulting a suspect - Los ... (http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/18/local/me-maywood18)

Police Officer Convicted of Road Rage - Associated Content (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/201473/police_officer_convicted_of_road_rage.html)

Police Officer Convicted Of Assaulting 4 Teens - washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/02/AR2007030201691.html)

Police officer convicted of killing gay lover

Clearwater Police Officer Convicted As A Thief

Suspended police officer convicted : Buffalo/Erie County : The ... (http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/buffaloerie/story/542127.html)

SUSPENDED CAMDEN POLICE OFFICER CONVICTED OF OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT ... (http://www.njdcj.org/njinsurancefraud/release/2006/august/bollettieri_0811.htm)

AG - Detroit Police Officer Convicted (http://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,1607,7-164-34739-208028--,00.html)

[JenyEliza]

Interesting. Here's the account of witnesses to this "accident":

http://www.kvbc.com/Global/story.asp?S=10401953&nav=menu107_2


Living in her home for over five years, Carrie O'Dell can hear the noise coming from Flamingo Road. Accustomed to the sound of sirens, it was that specific noise which was missing from the morning of May 7.

"I know what direction (the sirens) are coming from and how close, especially at that time of night. Absolutely no siren; that explosion came out of dead silence. You didn't even know it was a car wreck by the sound of it."

And O'Dell is not alone; Tarin Marvel says she and five others were in her backyard when the accident occurred; she says they all know what they heard and saw, despite Metro's statements to the contrary.

"We heard nothing but an explosion; (we) ran to the fence and didn't even realize it was a car accident. There (were) no lights and sirens, no breaks.
Nothing. (Metro) made me out to be a liar and I was crazy."

Both O'Dell and Marvel say the man accused of causing this fatal accident, Calvin Darling, not only rushed over to aid Officer Manor, but police also confirm his blood alcohol level was under the legal limit.

"I never thought from the beginning he was under the influence; he was very quick to respond. I think the charges need to be dropped because...yielding to an emergency vehicle? How do you know it is an emergency vehicle when they are driving 110 miles per hour with no lights or sirens?"

Both witnesses agree that, even without lights and sirens, a speed of 109 miles per hour is excessive. And although they are happy that the truth came out about that morning, they feel for the officer's family and are thankful that more lives were not lost.

Darling's attorney issued this statement in repsonse to Metro's press conference

Wednesday:
"It is unfortunate that Officer Manor lost his life on May 7, 2009. It is unfortunate that he lost his life driving to a false alarm. It is unfortunate that my client Calvin Darling, a law abiding citizen, was operating the vehicle involved in that collision.

Thankfully LVMPD came forth with the facts that substantiate my client's statement of how the accident occurred. Calvin Darling is a hard working, honest and devoted family man who only wishes to return to his pre-accident life."

Beyond this, Darling has not commented on the crash. He is scheduled to be in court June 8.

[FidelisAdMortem]

Sgt,
It is nothing to make light of. It may have something to do with all the stories about police officers being convicted of various crimes that we read on a daily basis. These are convictions, not charges. And is from the first page of a google search for "police officer convicted", which returned more than 27,900 hits.


It is nothing to make light of, which is why you posted such an inflammatory opinion of why Drew Peterson has not been charged up until now without any proof that a coverup existed. Yet you want to be taken seriously and take objection to Sgtmacs reponse to yours. Very telling.

Futhermore, your own search and results from google proves that we like everyone else live by the sword and ultimately die by the sword.

[JenyEliza]

And yet more information (for those who care)

http://www.kvbc.com/Global/story.asp?S=10401809&nav=15MV

According to Metro, Officer Manor was speeding over 100 miles per hour in that residential neighborhood and was not wearing a seatbelt. Sheriff
Gillespie says the final report is not yet complete, but Wednesday, he shed surprising light on what happened the morning of May 7.

"We reported that Officer Manor was rolling code, which means using his emergency lights and siren," says Sheriff Gillespie. "Follow-up interviews and tests on the patrol car light bar have shown that he was not using his emergency lights and siren."

These were difficult words for the sheriff to say out loud, especially after dealing with the loss of one of his own. But they are true words, according to forensic evidence. In addition to not using his lights and siren, investigators confirmed that prior to the crash, Officer James Manor was traveling at 109 miles per hour, slowing down to 90 miles per hour at the time of impact.

"The speed limit in that area was 45 miles per hour," says Sheriff Gillespie.

"Officer Manor's speed was excessive and unsafe. Additionally, we know that Officer Manor was not wearing his seatbelt at the time of the crash."
45-year-old Calvin Darling was also involved in the crash; initially cited for DUI and failure to yield to an emergency vehicle, the sheriff says Officer

Manor's excessive speed is going to be a significant contributing factor as to whether or not charges against Darling are filed. Darling's blood alcohol level will be an important factor as well; he tested at .035 the morning of the crash, well below the legal limit of .08.

[mgifford]

There are two negative subjects on the forums that I simply can't stand to see.
One is preachers and the other is police officers.

The preachers get bashed to a patheic degree, then the PEO get bashed because they (some) commit crimes. This is what I have to say, being both.

Preachers get bashed whether or not they're proven to have done anything wrong. When a police officer breaks the law and goes to jail, he's no longer a police officer, but a criminal after being convicted. I think citizens should take their hate for LEO to someone else besides we LEO. We didn't do it.

[terri910]

There are two negative subjects on the forums that I simply can't stand to see.
One is preachers and the other is police officers.

The preachers get bashed to a patheic degree, then the PEO get bashed because they (some) commit crimes. This is what I have to say, being both.

Preachers get bashed whether or not they're proven to have done anything wrong. When a police officer breaks the law and goes to jail, he's no longer a police officer, but a criminal after being convicted. I think citizens should take their hate for LEO to someone else besides we LEO. We didn't do it.
It sounds as if you can't stand to see ALL the members of a specific group to be painted with a broad brush based on the actions of a few. That is reasonable. But it seems equally unreasonable to paint even the few bad members of a specific group with the broad brush of respect based on the actions of those that deserve the respect.

Better, perhaps, to realize that the groups are made up of individuals that may or may not be worthy of respect or scorn.

[mgifford]

It sounds as if you can't stand to see ALL the members of a specific group to be painted with a broad brush based on the actions of a few. That is reasonable. But it seems equally unreasonable to paint even the few bad members of a specific group with the broad brush of respect based on the actions of those that deserve the respect.

Better, perhaps, to realize that the groups are made up of individuals that may or may not be worthy of respect or scorn.

Negative: I'm saying that when they crossover and commit crimes and get convicted, they're no longer LEO, but are numbered with the "criminal group". Our department convicted two of OUR OWN of murder and they're no longer part of us.

[Cav Scout]

I have a question here.

I shall preface first.

I have no doubt the Officer was wrong. I have no doubt the other guy was innocent of the DUI charges.
I have no doubt when it all comes out in the wash it will be settled, as there is too much light being brought upon this incident.

What I want to know is why this particular case has a few so heated up here?

People do stupid **** all the time, be they Soldier, LEO, Rescue or Fire.

I know its hard for some to understand but even we are not perfect. We as in all of us each have different standards we use when we make decisions to do things, no matter the training, no matter the situation, we are all equally different. Two officers standing side by side are not the same, nor are two Soldiers yet sometimes I get the idea that some expect us all to be perfect...
It would be nice, but that is just not the case.

I am not excusing the Officer in question, it seems like he has been handled already...

I made a comment earlier in the thread and got the third degree over it, and I thought it was a fairly straightforward comment. The guy WAS an idiot, and for that he is dead. So be it.

The several million LEO's out there are not perfect people nor should they be. Lets not bash our resident LEO's on this board because they simply presented a perspective that we may not see.

[terri910]

Negative: I'm saying that when they crossover and commit crimes and get convicted, they're no longer LEO, but are numbered with the "criminal group". Our department convicted two of OUR OWN of murder and they're no longer part of us.
But there WERE LEO's when they committed the crime(s).

Tell me....do you think that in this country, in your county or town, that there are people that get away with breaking the law? Does it happen at all?

[Stopthinkingsomuch!!!]

Well lucky you, I live in Las Vegas and that officers was doing his job. Granted he was speeding, yet it was 3 or 4 in the morning, and on Flamingo Road. There is hardly any traffic on the streets, if any.

Apparently some teen called saying that her step dad beat her and gave her a black eye. She was hiding in her room closet and said that she was scared and that he had a key to her bedroom. The 911 call was released recently on the local news. The girl did sound scared.

Anyway, who 2 cars were sent and they both were speeding, wrong, I know. And they didn't have their sirens on. The other driver went in front of the squad car. He was eventually released.


Now for the actions of the cops. Who knows why they didn't turn there sirens on. I do know that now sometimes in Vegas the police will use their lights instead of their sirens. Maybe they thought that the step dad would do something drastic if he heard the sirens.

Anyway, It seems that the officer who died was a good police officer and gave a lot to his community even before he joined the force.

_____
A little insight, for about a week or two after the crash it happened on an intersection, there were still police officers just standing at the spot mourning. Even at night time. Sad to think about. You can tell that they suffered a heart felt lost.

[mgifford]

but there were leo's when they committed the crime(s).

Tell me....do you think that in this country, in your county or town, that there are people that get away with breaking the law? Does it happen at all?

lol!

[Broseph]

Uhm......Doctors kill tens of thousands of patients each year.......how many other doctors bury those patients without outing their own? MOST OF THEM!



What we should REALLY do is turn on each other like a raving pack of jackals every time someone clown even MAKES an allegation, just like some of YOU folks........just run around like DRAMA queens screaming about how all of us are CORRUPT STOOGES of the state out to brutalize you........that's what you want, isn't it?

Based on my 14 years experience of being on the receiving end of WEEKLY false allegations by members of the public for doing my job, many of those allegations of the most amusing and absurd kind, yeah.......i'm gonna give a cop the benefit of the doubt.......sorry you have a problem with that.......but it's been MY experience that 99 times out of 100, when someone makes an allegation against the police THEY are lying, not the police..........sure, we need to catch that ONE TIME out of a hundred, but that doesn't mean we flip it upside down and CRUCIFY 99 innocent cops to get that one bad apple.

:eh: :( :((

[Broseph]

It sounds as if you can't stand to see ALL the members of a specific group to be painted with a broad brush based on the actions of a few. That is reasonable. But it seems equally unreasonable to paint even the few bad members of a specific group with the broad brush of respect based on the actions of those that deserve the respect.

Better, perhaps, to realize that the groups are made up of individuals that may or may not be worthy of respect or scorn.

You know what they say...

the 90% give the 10% a bad name.

[Cav Scout]

Lets all just bash Law Enforcement shall we....


Ready GO!

[JenyEliza]

Well lucky you, I live in Las Vegas and that officers was doing his job. Granted he was speeding, yet it was 3 or 4 in the morning, and on Flamingo Road. There is hardly any traffic on the streets, if any.

Apparently some teen called saying that her step dad beat her and gave her a black eye. She was hiding in her room closet and said that she was scared and that he had a key to her bedroom. The 911 call was released recently on the local news. The girl did sound scared.

Anyway, who 2 cars were sent and they both were speeding, wrong, I know. And they didn't have their sirens on. The other driver went in front of the squad car. He was eventually released.


Now for the actions of the cops. Who knows why they didn't turn there sirens on. I do know that now sometimes in Vegas the police will use their lights instead of their sirens. Maybe they thought that the step dad would do something drastic if he heard the sirens.

Anyway, It seems that the officer who died was a good police officer and gave a lot to his community even before he joined the force.

_____
A little insight, for about a week or two after the crash it happened on an intersection, there were still police officers just standing at the spot mourning. Even at night time. Sad to think about. You can tell that they suffered a heart felt lost.

I am sure the fellow officers are suffering a heavy loss. What happened to Officer Manor is horrible--for his family, for his children, for his fellow officers.

However, it was absolutely preventable. And it was in HIS hand to prevent the accident. He should not have been speeding at 109 mph in a 45 mph residential area. He should have had his seat belt on. He should have had lights and siren going. He did not.

Because he decided to speed with no lights, no siren, Mr. Darling had no warning of his approach and was hit by the officer.

Mr. Darling was arrested and charged wtih FELONY DUI. Those charges have still not been dropped. If he is convicted of these charges, he will go to jail for a very long time. His freedom is still not certain. It is not guaranteed these charges will be dropped. He has a court date of June 8.

Even if the charges are dropped, his job as an engineer at the Bellagio is gone--thanks to this so called "accident". Mr. Darling has a family too. They depended on his paycheck--now gone. Even if the charges are ultimately dropped, he has a FELONY ARREST on his record now. He will never be able to answer (honestly) the "have you ever been charged or convicted of a felony? If yes, please explain" question on a job application thanks to the actions of Officer Manor.

Mr. Darling has had to hire an attorney ($$), its hard to pay for an attorney when you are unemployed.

Perhaps the reason so many are so upset by this case is that but for the Grace of God, this could have been any one of us. We could find ourselves in the same position, and be at the mercy of the boys in blue. All it takes is to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, just like Mr. Darling.

[IndyBec]

Is there some silent rule that says someone must be punished everytime something tragic happens? Our civil duty, however, is not to mete out punishment for tragedy, but to protect the innocent. The driver of the truck is innocent until proven guilty and the evidence here is scant, much less significant than the facts against the officer's actions. May he rest in peace.

[JenyEliza]

Lets all just bash Law Enforcement shall we....


Ready GO!

Nobody is bashing ALL law enforcement.

Geez. :rolleyes: That chip must be pretty heavy if you think so.

[CMike11]

It's unfair to blame all police for the actions of a few.

Because a few priests were charged with shtuping boys doesn't mean all priests do this.

Because a "few" police do bad things doesn't mean all police do it. That is unfair.

In this case, the police were clearly wrong. Darling had to undergo a lot of trauma for something that isn't his fault.

I do have a question though.

How come he isn't dead or seriously injured?

[JenyEliza]

What is with LVMPD officers running their cruisers recklessly with no lights and siren? There have been THREE such crashes this month involving LVMPD offcers.

Seems to me the LVMPD is just asking for more fatalties with the way they are operating. This makes ZERO sense. What the hell?

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/may/25/metro-officer-involved-third-collision-month/


A Metro Police patrol officer and the drivers of three other vehicles suffered minor injuries shortly before 4 p.m. Monday after the officer ran a red light at an intersection, investigators said. It's the third crash involving a Metro Police officer this month.

The collision occurred at the intersection of Twain Avenue and Rainbow Boulevard.

The officer's 2005 Ford Crown Victoria was northbound on Rainbow when it failed to stop for a red light and struck a Honda Accord traveling east on Twain, police said. The impact forced the police cruiser and the Honda into a Lincoln Town Car and a Hyundai Santa Fe that were traveling through the intersection on Twain.

Eyewitnesses told investigating officers that the Metro Police patrol car was not operating flashing lights or sirens.

The officer has not been identified.

Sgt. Oscar Chavez of Metro's accident investigation team said Sheriff Doug Gillespie has established an executive review committee to examine recent collisions involving Metro Police officers.

If I were a Las Vegan, I would be very concerned about sharing the roads with the police.

Wow. :eek:

[MrShotShot]

How exactly is one supposed to know to yield to an emergency vehicle when they are not using their lights or sirens?

Isn't the use of lights and sirens the primary indication that there is, in fact, an emergency?

Should we be pulling over to the side of the road every single time we see a police cruiser, ambulance, or fire truck?

[JenyEliza]

It's unfair to blame all police for the actions of a few.

Because a few priests were charged with shtuping boys doesn't mean all priests do this.

Because a "few" police do bad things doesn't mean all police do it. That is unfair.

In this case, the police were clearly wrong. Darling had to undergo a lot of trauma for something that isn't his fault.

I do have a question though.

How come he isn't dead or seriously injured?

I don't know why he wasn't killed or seriously injured. It's truly a miracle if you ask me. Not many people walk away from an accident when they've been it at 109 mph.

However, it wasn't completely uninjured. Here's his booking mugshot, which shows he was definitely wounded in the accident:
http://media.lasvegassun.com/media/img/photos/2009/05/11/darling_t180.jpg?

[jimjames418]

How exactly is one supposed to know to yield to an emergency vehicle when they are not using their lights or sirens?

Isn't the use of lights and sirens the primary indication that there is, in fact, an emergency?

Should we be pulling over to the side of the road every single time we see a police cruiser, ambulance, or fire truck?
All members of the public are to be mind readers and know where the police officers are located and what they are doing at all times. If they fail to do so they will be arrested and put in jail. :twisted:

[jimjames418]

It is nothing to make light of, which is why you posted such an inflammatory opinion of why Drew Peterson has not been charged up until now without any proof that a coverup existed. Yet you want to be taken seriously and take objection to Sgtmacs reponse to yours. Very telling. I was only going by what the people on the scene said. His police chief said that the investigation may have been lax because of his status as an officer in the department.
Futhermore, your own search and results from google proves that we like everyone else live by the sword and ultimately die by the sword.We all are ultimately responsible for our own words and actions, not those of others.

[notluzn]

This is still talked about? Cop messed up. I hope that guy gets a new truck.

[Broseph]

Is there some silent rule that says someone must be punished everytime something tragic happens?

I've noticed that in this country, much more so than other countries, that seems to be the case. Prosecutors searching for somebody, anybody who they can put behind bars to show the public that the tragedy did not go without repercussion regardless of whether anyone was a fault or whether it was accidental.

[terri910]

If I were a Las Vegan...
*LOL* Vegan! (uber vegetarian, right?)


Maybe that's what they're called anyway, but it make me chuckle.

[IndyBec]

I've noticed that in this country, much more so than other countries, that seems to be the case. Prosecutors searching for somebody, anybody who they can put behind bars to show the public that the tragedy did not go without repercussion regardless of whether anyone was a fault or whether it was accidental.


It really is an inferior mentality, one of complete black-and-white unempathetic ignorance. Just one more piece of evidence that the American citizens' interest is becoming more and more owned by corporate entities.

[Cav Scout]

Nobody is bashing ALL law enforcement.

Geez. :rolleyes: That chip must be pretty heavy if you think so.

Really...


You know what they say...

the 90% give the 10% a bad name.

[NascarGirl2448]

Michigan is the same. You hit someone from the rear, your fault, break out the check book and start writing. :doh:

Same thing in North Carolina. Luckily I've never actually hit anyone, but have been rearended myself.

[JenyEliza]

Really...

1. Those are not MY words.

2. I think the poster who said that meant the 10% bad cops give the 90% good cops a bad name. They just got it backwards.

You cops need to take a chill pill. The personal defensivenes in this thread is astounding.

This thread is about a cops in Las Vegas who framed up an innocent man to cover up the misdeeds of one of their own--who died of his own stupdity.

It's not about YOU personally.

[JenyEliza]

*LOL* Vegan! (uber vegetarian, right?)


Maybe that's what they're called anyway, but it make me chuckle.

LOL. I didn't think of it that way.

I'm glad I could brighten your day! :mrgreen:

:hug:

Jen

[SUVRon]

If you paid attention: The OFFICER was SPEEDING without Emergency Lights and/or Siren! Now, who was in the wrong?



You are assuming the citizen hit the officer instead of the other way around. :wall:

Police do not respond to every emergency call with lights and siren like they do on TV. Some emergency calls create great danger for the officers if they have lights and sirens on.

[czzzaar]

Police do not respond to every emergency call with lights and siren like they do on TV. Some emergency calls create great danger for the officers if they have lights and sirens on.

This cop broke department policy. Period.

[SUVRon]

This cop broke department policy. Period.

I haven't read their General Orders so I wouldn't know if he did or not. I will never respond lights and sirens to certain calls and my department will back that 100%. Department policy isn't state law and department policy doesn't superceed state law. So if Vegas has a law on the books that officers must respond to all emergency calls with lights and sirens, there might be an argument there.

[jimjames418]

I haven't read their General Orders so I wouldn't know if he did or not. I will never respond lights and sirens to certain calls and my department will back that 100%. Department policy isn't state law and department policy doesn't superceed state law. So if Vegas has a law on the books that officers must respond to all emergency calls with lights and sirens, there might be an argument there.
IMHO any time a speed of 2 1/2 times the posted limit is called for, it would also call for the use of lights and sirens. I could be wrong, have been before, but if Vegas allowes their officers such freedom.......