Sheriff and Jeep - Page 14 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > General > Jeep Carnage & Wrecks > Sheriff and Jeep

Cess Recovery Gear Snatch Tow Strap OffRoad @ ROCKRIDGE4WDGEARSHADE Pocket Tops in stock and available at ROCKRIDGE Engo winches available at www.rockridge4wd.com! Free shipp

Reply
Unread 07-01-2013, 04:51 PM   #196
Siva283
Registered User
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Falling Waters, WV
Posts: 3,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPond View Post

What you're describing is "basic intent", which is one form of Criminal Intent.

The easiest way to describe basic intent is "what a reasonable person in the same situation would have known". In your example above, a reasonable person would know that drinking leads to impaired driving ability... and so on...
So doea triple digit speeds

Sent from my SPH-L300 using JeepForum

__________________
1995 YJ. 2 inch BDS Spring lift. 1 inch shackle lift. 1.25 inch JKS Body Lift 33x12.5x15's. Engo 10,000 pound winch.

[QUOTE=Magnum;14117863] I gave the Jeep the required offering of $$, sweat, and blood, and everything works fine now. -- Jim[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ldso;16498409]. It started with a $200 axle, and a few thousand dollars later I was done :)[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Luuca;16122017]diagnose the real issue before you start going all Obama on it - spending mad cash you'll need for other important things.

Ask me how I know...[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Overhead;17658665]this is also my second set of RC springs this year. I'd rather spend the money again and get something that will last.[/QUOTE]
Siva283 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-01-2013, 05:01 PM   #197
MPond
Web Wheeler
 
MPond's Avatar
2006 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Newbury Park, CA
Posts: 1,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siva283 View Post
So doea triple digit speeds

Sent from my SPH-L300 using JeepForum
Yes, but the drunk driver can't argue there were other mitigating circumstances for why he/she was drinking and driving, whereas the police office responding to a call can.
__________________
2006 Black Unlimited 6-speed, Rubicon Express 4.5" Long Arm Kit
MPond is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-01-2013, 07:29 PM   #198
Siva283
Registered User
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Falling Waters, WV
Posts: 3,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPond View Post

Yes, but the drunk driver can't argue there were other mitigating circumstances for why he/she was drinking and driving, whereas the police office responding to a call can.
Still a bad judgment call. He should still stand trial. It is still whatever flaver of criminal intent or neglect you want to group it under. You don't do 110 on roads with houses in view. Whay if a kid would have ran out in the road and he took oit the kid

Sent from my SPH-L300 using JeepForum
__________________
1995 YJ. 2 inch BDS Spring lift. 1 inch shackle lift. 1.25 inch JKS Body Lift 33x12.5x15's. Engo 10,000 pound winch.

[QUOTE=Magnum;14117863] I gave the Jeep the required offering of $$, sweat, and blood, and everything works fine now. -- Jim[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ldso;16498409]. It started with a $200 axle, and a few thousand dollars later I was done :)[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Luuca;16122017]diagnose the real issue before you start going all Obama on it - spending mad cash you'll need for other important things.

Ask me how I know...[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Overhead;17658665]this is also my second set of RC springs this year. I'd rather spend the money again and get something that will last.[/QUOTE]
Siva283 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-02-2013, 12:57 AM   #199
MPond
Web Wheeler
 
MPond's Avatar
2006 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Newbury Park, CA
Posts: 1,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siva283

Still a bad judgment call. He should still stand trial. It is still whatever flaver of criminal intent or neglect you want to group it under. You don't do 110 on roads with houses in view. Whay if a kid would have ran out in the road and he took oit the kid

Sent from my SPH-L300 using JeepForum
I don't disagree with the bad judgement call and not doing 110 on roads with homes. But I still think the "stand trial" part is a grey area, because it leads to a slippery slope.

But we don't have to agree.

Sent from my iPhone using JeepForum
__________________
2006 Black Unlimited 6-speed, Rubicon Express 4.5" Long Arm Kit
MPond is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-02-2013, 03:49 PM   #200
little_Jeep
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPond View Post
What you're describing is "basic intent", which is one form of Criminal Intent.

The easiest way to describe basic intent is "what a reasonable person in the same situation would have known". In your example above, a reasonable person would know that drinking leads to impaired driving ability... and so on...

Maybe, but in the context of this on going conversation, it appears to mean he didn't intend to cause death or injury, therefore, no criminal intent.

I think there is a strong argument that the deputy's careless and reckless disregard for the safety of others, is criminal intent.

He was a Professional so there is a higher standard, prior training, and department protocol that his action would be compared to. He was driving at a high speed...maybe an excessive speed, during what is typically a heavy traffic time, coming into City limits, where he should have known there would be more traffic, and more possible hazards (other vehicles, pedestrians, etc.) near or on the roadway. I am not saying he should have gone to trial, but by no means was this situation that didn't warrant further review by Grand Jury and County Prosecutor.
little_Jeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-02-2013, 09:30 PM   #201
joe_jeep
Registered User
2005 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: hazel park, mi, michigan
Posts: 1,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPond View Post
That's an asinine statement. You make is sound like he wanted to kill someone. Certainly, he screwed up, really big, but that's not murder.

"Murder" is defined as "the premeditated killing of one human being by another". The cop in this story made a bad mistake, but it wasn't premieditated.

And my guess is he'll never get past it either.
he chose to ignore all safety guidelines. the sheriff said 80 mph max was the guideline.

he drove his cruiser in a way that he knew there was a good chance something bad could or would happen.

he did it on a 2 lane road that had little room for evasive action.

passing a vehicle on a 2 lane highway at 115 mph is not negligent, thats suicidal! everyone knows that is a recipe for disaster!

that was no mistake on his part! he chose to drive like that, even though he knew he was not allowed to.

anyway you cut it he did it on purpose, it was his choice to drive like a complete jerk!

i hope he never gets past it, he should not ever get past killing someone.

he is supposed to know better, and lead by example! that means being safe and following the "set guidelines of safety".

call it negligent homicide if it makes u feel better, it is still murder!
__________________
glfwda #6624
2005 rubicon sahara lj #592
joe_jeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-03-2013, 02:04 AM   #202
MPond
Web Wheeler
 
MPond's Avatar
2006 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Newbury Park, CA
Posts: 1,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe_jeep

he chose to ignore all safety guidelines. the sheriff said 80 mph max was the guideline.

he drove his cruiser in a way that he knew there was a good chance something bad could or would happen.

he did it on a 2 lane road that had little room for evasive action.

passing a vehicle on a 2 lane highway at 115 mph is not negligent, thats suicidal! everyone knows that is a recipe for disaster!

that was no mistake on his part! he chose to drive like that, even though he knew he was not allowed to.

anyway you cut it he did it on purpose, it was his choice to drive like a complete jerk!

i hope he never gets past it, he should not ever get past killing someone.

he is supposed to know better, and lead by example! that means being safe and following the "set guidelines of safety".

call it negligent homicide if it makes u feel better, it is still murder!
Just because he "chose to drive like that" and he is "supposed to know better", that is not the same as being premeditated.

The definition of Premeditate is:

Verb
Think out or plan (an action, esp. a crime) beforehand

The cop made choices and may have known better, but that's not the same as planning a crime in advance. So no, it's not murder because it was not premeditated.

Look... I understand the point you're trying to make, and I respect your opinion. But I just don't agree with your rationale. Maybe we should just agree to disagree.
__________________
2006 Black Unlimited 6-speed, Rubicon Express 4.5" Long Arm Kit
MPond is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-03-2013, 02:20 AM   #203
970001zj
Registered User
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,985
cops cant drive for **** , thread
__________________
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f22/its-jeep-grand-cherokee-you-1443132/#post14516738
970001zj is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-16-2013, 10:38 AM   #204
adodderer
Registered User
1999 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Fresno, California
Posts: 8
Some where earlier in this thread pg 8 maybe(on the iPhone app) it says that ISP stated when the collision happened the officer was doing around 80. That before the collision he had reached speeds in excess of 100mph. Does this change anyone's opinion?

So as he was passing he was doing approximately 80mph...I would say 80 in a 55 is not excessive
adodderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-16-2013, 12:25 PM   #205
Siva283
Registered User
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Falling Waters, WV
Posts: 3,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by adodderer View Post
Some where earlier in this thread pg 8 maybe(on the iPhone app) it says that ISP stated when the collision happened the officer was doing around 80. That before the collision he had reached speeds in excess of 100mph. Does this change anyone's opinion?

So as he was passing he was doing approximately 80mph...I would say 80 in a 55 is not excessive
When he realized the Jeep was in his path he tried to slow down and couldnt. He was doing 80 at the time if impact because he couldnt slow down enough to have enough control to avoid the collision.
__________________
1995 YJ. 2 inch BDS Spring lift. 1 inch shackle lift. 1.25 inch JKS Body Lift 33x12.5x15's. Engo 10,000 pound winch.

[QUOTE=Magnum;14117863] I gave the Jeep the required offering of $$, sweat, and blood, and everything works fine now. -- Jim[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ldso;16498409]. It started with a $200 axle, and a few thousand dollars later I was done :)[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Luuca;16122017]diagnose the real issue before you start going all Obama on it - spending mad cash you'll need for other important things.

Ask me how I know...[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Overhead;17658665]this is also my second set of RC springs this year. I'd rather spend the money again and get something that will last.[/QUOTE]
Siva283 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-23-2013, 07:38 PM   #206
Hubie
Registered User
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Bath, Maine
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siva283 View Post
When he realized the Jeep was in his path he tried to slow down and couldnt. He was doing 80 at the time if impact because he couldnt slow down enough to have enough control to avoid the collision.
That is either a guess on your part or a complete fabrication. I went on line and read the warrant. The primary reasons that this case was not prosecuted as a criminal complaint was that the ESTIMATED speed of the Deputies vehicle was 80-85 m.p.h. prior to the collision. This is based off of pure physics and was determined during the vehicle autopsy by the State Police (third party agency). They measure skid marks, witness marks on the pavement and involved stationary objects and both vehicles.

The speeds of 115 that were reported, were speeds the Deputy stated in his report that were the MAXIMUM speed he felt he traveled during this call.

Based on the damage to the two vehicles, considering their weight and once again using physics to make an informed estimate, the State Police estimated that at impact the Deputies Vehicle was traveling between 50 and 60 m.p.h. Which is still a horrendous impact.

Having been involved in removing people and bodies from motor vehicle accidents as a Fire Fighter for over 25 years, I can attest that a 50-60 m.p.h. collision is rarely survivable for anyone, seat belt use and air bags are pretty much useless at those speeds when considering the G forces involved. It's likely the only reason the Deputy survived this crash was that his vehicle lost it's energy in a more survivable fashion during deceleration while the Jeep driver went from a zero G load to hundreds of G's in an instant. Also probably didn't help that he was ejected, but he might not have survived anyway.

The long and short is that the Deputy was not in violation of any state or federal law when the accident occurred. NTSB has been harping for decades that emergency vehicles are easily capable of out running their sirens (traveling faster than their siren can safely project the warning to other vehicles); coupled with advances in vehicle soundproofing over the last several decades.

The difference you keep pointing out is that you and I are not Law Enforcement Officials and we are not tasked with responding to emergency calls where someones life is on the line. We are just commuters or fellow travelers on the road. If we pass, especially at speeds which exceed the legally posted limits, the safety of all other vehicles we are overtaking are our responsibility. That is the law in all 50 states.

Look safe up in the dictionary. It states that it is the "absence of risk". By this standard, no one is ever "safe".
Hubie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-23-2013, 07:54 PM   #207
Siva283
Registered User
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Falling Waters, WV
Posts: 3,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hubie View Post

That is either a guess on your part or a complete fabrication. I went on line and read the warrant. The primary reasons that this case was not prosecuted as a criminal complaint was that the ESTIMATED speed of the Deputies vehicle was 80-85 m.p.h. prior to the collision. This is based off of pure physics and was determined during the vehicle autopsy by the State Police (third party agency). They measure skid marks, witness marks on the pavement and involved stationary objects and both vehicles.

The speeds of 115 that were reported, were speeds the Deputy stated in his report that were the MAXIMUM speed he felt he traveled during this call.

Based on the damage to the two vehicles, considering their weight and once again using physics to make an informed estimate, the State Police estimated that at impact the Deputies Vehicle was traveling between 50 and 60 m.p.h. Which is still a horrendous impact.

Having been involved in removing people and bodies from motor vehicle accidents as a Fire Fighter for over 25 years, I can attest that a 50-60 m.p.h. collision is rarely survivable for anyone, seat belt use and air bags are pretty much useless at those speeds when considering the G forces involved. It's likely the only reason the Deputy survived this crash was that his vehicle lost it's energy in a more survivable fashion during deceleration while the Jeep driver went from a zero G load to hundreds of G's in an instant. Also probably didn't help that he was ejected, but he might not have survived anyway.

The long and short is that the Deputy was not in violation of any state or federal law when the accident occurred. NTSB has been harping for decades that emergency vehicles are easily capable of out running their sirens (traveling faster than their siren can safely project the warning to other vehicles); coupled with advances in vehicle soundproofing over the last several decades.

The difference you keep pointing out is that you and I are not Law Enforcement Officials and we are not tasked with responding to emergency calls where someones life is on the line. We are just commuters or fellow travelers on the road. If we pass, especially at speeds which exceed the legally posted limits, the safety of all other vehicles we are overtaking are our responsibility. That is the law in all 50 states.

Look safe up in the dictionary. It states that it is the "absence of risk". By this standard, no one is ever "safe".
I am foing from what I read. I was in an accident in high school where they did all those tests. They are a guess at best acxording to them I hit a tree at 90 do you think I would ve alive let alone unhurt. I don't. I would be dead. There are factor unknown to them or anyone that wasn't there within minites thay can throw those tests off as well as human error. Speed is a contributing factor and the sheriff went to fast to control his vehicle. Its his fault and he should be charged with manslaughter period same as you or I if we failed to control our vehicle. They are taught to drive at elevated speeds however they are still responsible for what happens. As far as assumptions you are assuming no teating human or other errors. Their skid mark test are simple friction test. Different tires from the ones used can affect this greatly as well as moisture or other contaminants. Hell the way the read them is off. They claim they can tell if you hit your breaks or not. They are 50/50 at best.

Sent from my SPH-L300 using JeepForum
__________________
1995 YJ. 2 inch BDS Spring lift. 1 inch shackle lift. 1.25 inch JKS Body Lift 33x12.5x15's. Engo 10,000 pound winch.

[QUOTE=Magnum;14117863] I gave the Jeep the required offering of $$, sweat, and blood, and everything works fine now. -- Jim[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ldso;16498409]. It started with a $200 axle, and a few thousand dollars later I was done :)[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Luuca;16122017]diagnose the real issue before you start going all Obama on it - spending mad cash you'll need for other important things.

Ask me how I know...[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Overhead;17658665]this is also my second set of RC springs this year. I'd rather spend the money again and get something that will last.[/QUOTE]
Siva283 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-23-2013, 07:55 PM   #208
Siva283
Registered User
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Falling Waters, WV
Posts: 3,698
I can also show you plenty of reports with tons of errors. Noone was arrested so there woupd ve no warrant only a report.

Sent from my SPH-L300 using JeepForum
__________________
1995 YJ. 2 inch BDS Spring lift. 1 inch shackle lift. 1.25 inch JKS Body Lift 33x12.5x15's. Engo 10,000 pound winch.

[QUOTE=Magnum;14117863] I gave the Jeep the required offering of $$, sweat, and blood, and everything works fine now. -- Jim[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ldso;16498409]. It started with a $200 axle, and a few thousand dollars later I was done :)[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Luuca;16122017]diagnose the real issue before you start going all Obama on it - spending mad cash you'll need for other important things.

Ask me how I know...[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Overhead;17658665]this is also my second set of RC springs this year. I'd rather spend the money again and get something that will last.[/QUOTE]
Siva283 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-24-2013, 09:41 AM   #209
Ross
Registered User
2001 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: BUM****, MO
Posts: 10,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPond View Post
Just because he "chose to drive like that" and he is "supposed to know better", that is not the same as being premeditated.

The definition of Premeditate is:

Verb
Think out or plan (an action, esp. a crime) beforehand

The cop made choices and may have known better, but that's not the same as planning a crime in advance. So no, it's not murder because it was not premeditated.

Look... I understand the point you're trying to make, and I respect your opinion. But I just don't agree with your rationale. Maybe we should just agree to disagree.
The deputy was negligent and knew better, and should be held resposible.

Definition of negligent (adj)

negˇliˇgent [ négglijənt ] 1.habitually careless: habitually careless or irresponsible
2.guilty of negligence: guilty of failing to provide a proper or reasonable level of care
3.casual in appearance: casual in matters of dress or general appearance, whether considered stylish or slovenly
__________________
Schitzangiggles: We used to teach our children to fight evil, now we teach them that fighting is evil.

2001 TJ, 33 trxus MTs , W, locked, belly up, some armor.

"If you aim at nothing, you will hit it every time." Zig Ziglar
Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07-24-2013, 09:47 PM   #210
MPond
Web Wheeler
 
MPond's Avatar
2006 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Newbury Park, CA
Posts: 1,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross

The deputy was negligent and knew better, and should be held resposible.

Definition of negligent (adj)

negˇliˇgent [ négglijənt ] 1.habitually careless: habitually careless or irresponsible
2.guilty of negligence: guilty of failing to provide a proper or reasonable level of care
3.casual in appearance: casual in matters of dress or general appearance, whether considered stylish or slovenly
You didn't explain how his actions meet any of the 3 above definitions for negligent.

1 - nowhere does it says he drove like this habitually.

2 - you don't have enough info to know how much care he used.

3 - his appearance isn't relevant.

At any rate, you haven't presented a viable argument for why he was negligent.

Sent from my iPhone using JeepForum
__________________
2006 Black Unlimited 6-speed, Rubicon Express 4.5" Long Arm Kit
MPond is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.