Sheriff and Jeep - Page 5 - 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

Ruffstuff Axle Simple Swap Kit!ROCK BOTTOM prices on LIFT KITS at Rockridge4wd!! WANT TO Introducing MONSTALINER™ UV Permanent DIY Roll On Bed Line

Reply
Unread 02-08-2012, 11:29 AM   #61
timatoe
Registered User
1990 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Grass Valley California
Posts: 13,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBailey View Post
No I read the article above. I do not condone drunk driving. At those speeds the effects of lights and sirens are diminished. The man was hit in the drivers side of the jeep while he was making a left hand turn into his driveway. It is very obvious the deputy was driving at a speed beyond his abilty. He should have slowed down when he approached any other vehicles. I stand by my opinion that the deputy was wreckless and an innocent bystander was killed because of it.
AGAIN

The driver of the Jeep was hit in the left side because HE turned IN FRONT of the oncoming Officer and he was DRUNK, likely wouldn't have happened if he were sober and obeying the rules of the road and pulled to the right and STOPPED.

Not sure how it's "obvious" that the Deputy was driving beyond his ability when someone else turned in front of him.

People with zero specialized training in high speed driving routinely drive 80+ on the highway, funny how cop haters immediately jump on the "above his ability" BS when something bad happens.

Should he be driving 115? Maybe not, maybe so. Call your local Police Agency and let them know that under NO CIRCUMSTANCE should they drive double the speed limit if they're coming to your aid.

I'd like to know exactly how the 115 mph was determined as well. Just a few weeks back some politician was supposedly doing 109 when his vehicle crashed. He apparently fell asleep at the wheel and left the roadway, his speed was determined by the on board computer that measures wheel speed, that doesn't mean for a second the vehicle was going that fast.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Orwell
We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
timatoe is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 11:42 AM   #62
little_Jeep
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by timatoe View Post
AGAIN

The driver of the Jeep was hit in the left side because HE turned IN FRONT of the oncoming Officer and he was DRUNK, likely wouldn't have happened if he were sober and obeying the rules of the road and pulled to the right and STOPPED.

Not sure how it's "obvious" that the Deputy was driving beyond his ability when someone else turned in front of him.

People with zero specialized training in high speed driving routinely drive 80+ on the highway, funny how cop haters immediately jump on the "above his ability" BS when something bad happens.

Should he be driving 115? Maybe not, maybe so. Call your local Police Agency and let them know that under NO CIRCUMSTANCE should they drive double the speed limit if they're coming to your aid.

I'd like to know exactly how the 115 mph was determined as well. Just a few weeks back some politician was supposedly doing 109 when his vehicle crashed. He apparently fell asleep at the wheel and left the roadway, his speed was determined by the on board computer that measures wheel speed, that doesn't mean for a second the vehicle was going that fast.
If you guys are going to argue about this, please read post #55 and post #59 and try to get your information correct.. At this point, facts do not support either of you..
little_Jeep is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 11:49 AM   #63
TBailey
Registered User
1983 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pensacola,FL
Posts: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by timatoe

AGAIN

The driver of the Jeep was hit in the left side because HE turned IN FRONT of the oncoming Officer and he was DRUNK, likely wouldn't have happened if he were sober and obeying the rules of the road and pulled to the right and STOPPED.

Not sure how it's "obvious" that the Deputy was driving beyond his ability when someone else turned in front of him.

People with zero specialized training in high speed driving routinely drive 80+ on the highway, funny how cop haters immediately jump on the "above his ability" BS when something bad happens.

Should he be driving 115? Maybe not, maybe so. Call your local Police Agency and let them know that under NO CIRCUMSTANCE should they drive double the speed limit if they're coming to your aid.

I'd like to know exactly how the 115 mph was determined as well. Just a few weeks back some politician was supposedly doing 109 when his vehicle crashed. He apparently fell asleep at the wheel and left the roadway, his speed was determined by the on board computer that measures wheel speed, that doesn't mean for a second the vehicle was going that fast.
You have your opinion snd I have mine. Now **** off *******
TBailey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 12:15 PM   #64
Fireman4X4
Registered User
1994 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Granby, Colorado
Posts: 233
There seems to be a lot of discussion about the whole visibility of emergency vehicles. I can't say either way what happened in this case, as I was not there. In fact, I won't even comment much at all on this specific case.

I have been driving emergent to calls for 6 or 7 years now and have received TONS of training on how to properly do so. From what I have gathered over the years, LEO's get much of the same training, with more attention towards the 'tactical' spectrum. Close enough though.

What I can say is this: Most* of the people on our roads are somewhat observant citizens. This means that they usually recognize our pretty lights and sirens within a few seconds of coming into contact on the road. They typically get out of the way, or at least make a half-*** attempt. However, there is still an alarming number of drivers out there that are completely oblivious to our lights and sirens. I have followed people literally for miles while waiting for them to acknowledge our warning systems. With stereos, phones, food and plenty of other distractions, I am not overly surprised. It is just a good reminder for all of us to pay just a little more attention behind the wheel. On my current department, it is SOP to not operate the apparatus any more than 10 mph over the posted limit. Regardless of the call. Whether it is a confirmed structure fire with occupants trapped, or a false alarm at the grocery store.

As for this specific case, I think 115 or whatever speed he was actually going might have been excessive. But again, this is just opinion from someone not trained the way the S.O. was. I live in a large county with a small population that is spread out from one border to the other. It is not uncommon to see LEO's and EMS driving at what seems must be warp speed. From what I have been told from these guys, it is because the time frame to get from one end of the county to the other is so narrow. Whatever...that can be a whole different can of worms.

Anyway, just please remember to be just a little more observant when driving. Take that extra second to look in all directions for emergency vehicles, and PLEASE try your best to at least pull over out of the way.
__________________
When I Die, Bury me in my JEEP. 'Cause it's never been in a hole it couldn't get out of!
Colorado Jeep Club Member #252
1994 YJ with lots of fun stuff
2003 KJ Bone stock piece of junk[/COLOR][/CENTER]
Fireman4X4 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 02:09 PM   #65
timatoe
Registered User
1990 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Grass Valley California
Posts: 13,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by little_Jeep View Post
If you guys are going to argue about this, please read post #55 and post #59 and try to get your information correct.. At this point, facts do not support either of you..
Not sure which facts aren't supported in my post you quoted??

Did the driver of the Jeep turn left in front of the oncoming Deputy? Yes

Was the Deputy driving with required lights and siren activated? Yes

Was the driver of the Jeep legally drunk at a .08? Yes

If the driver of the Jeep pulled to the right and stopped as required by law would this collision have occurred? No

Seems as though the facts support my position.

Your understanding of DUI is lacking. There are other factors in a DUI yes, .08 is the legal level of intoxication, but you can certainly be convicted of DUI at levels lower than .08 based on FST's etc. just as you can do fine on FST's and be convicted at or above a .08 (the "professional drunk" comes to mind, someone rarely under a .10). BTW, it's near impossible to obtain a .08 BAC on "a couple of beers", even if you had two beers in an hour and only weighed 140 lbs, you'd still only be a .04.

FWIW......
Quote:
Over 39% of Idaho’s fatal collisions are caused by people driving under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs. In Idaho, it is illegal to drive under the influence of drugs or with a breath alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or more,
Quote:
it is illegal to drive in Idaho with a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.08% or more
http://www.isp.idaho.gov/citizen/documents/DUI-English.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBailey View Post
You have your opinion snd I have mine. Now **** off *******
Quite a valid argument there, typical of not having one.... No basis to support your argument? Resort to name calling.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Orwell
We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
timatoe is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 02:56 PM   #66
little_Jeep
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,947
Both vehicles were traveling in the same direction (East bound),,,, there was no "on coming", the Deputy was attempting to pass a much slower moving Jeep that was attempting to make a left hand turn (Turning North) into his driveway.

I do not know the DUI laws of Idaho. However, since we are talking about Mr. Johnson's blood alcohol level just meeting the minimum threshold of ,08, versus .07, I would feel confident that more evidence, (such as weaving in the road, slurred speech, failure of field sobriety test, etc.), than just this reading would be required in Court to get a conviction. I would also feel confident that a Jury would want more than just a breathalyzer reading that showed a reading of .08..... Don't get me wrong, if the reading was .18, that maybe all that is required. However, in a situation like this, I am sure that the investigators will completely trace the foot steps of both drivers. With the Deputy probably back to the moment he/she received call, and with Mr. Johnson back to when he got off work that afternoon or whatever. I guarantee you they will try to determine where the alcohol came into the picture and exactly what and how much did Mr. Johnson consume. If there are other drivers that witness the Jeep weaving or whatever, that will be documented.


Quote:
Originally Posted by timatoe View Post
Not sure which facts aren't supported in my post you quoted??

Did the driver of the Jeep turn left in front of the oncoming Deputy? Yes

Was the Deputy driving with required lights and siren activated? Yes

Was the driver of the Jeep legally drunk at a .08? Yes

If the driver of the Jeep pulled to the right and stopped as required by law would this collision have occurred? No

Seems as though the facts support my position.

Your understanding of DUI is lacking. There are other factors in a DUI yes, .08 is the legal level of intoxication, but you can certainly be convicted of DUI at levels lower than .08 based on FST's etc. just as you can do fine on FST's and be convicted at or above a .08 (the "professional drunk" comes to mind, someone rarely under a .10). BTW, it's near impossible to obtain a .08 BAC on "a couple of beers", even if you had two beers in an hour and only weighed 140 lbs, you'd still only be a .04.

FWIW...... http://www.isp.idaho.gov/citizen/documents/DUI-English.pdf



Quite a valid argument there, typical of not having one.... No basis to support your argument? Resort to name calling.
little_Jeep is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 03:14 PM   #67
TBailey
Registered User
1983 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pensacola,FL
Posts: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by timatoe
Quite a valid argument there, typical of not having one.... No basis to support your argument? Resort to name calling.
What you are failing to understand is that the deputy was not oncoming traffic. He was behind the jeep and attempted to pass him as he was turning into his driveway.
TBailey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 06:20 PM   #68
timatoe
Registered User
1990 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Grass Valley California
Posts: 13,821
Feel free to quote where I EVER said the Deputy was oncoming traffic. It doesn't matter the direction of travel, the Jeep turned IN FRONT OF the Deputy.

BTW, little jeep I've gotten many convictions with zero driving observations (taillight out or whatever) with a BAC of .08. It's the limit in all 50 States, there's really no difference there. What a jury wants to see to convict and what the law states are two completely different things. If he was a .08 he was drunk, that's not an opinion it's a scientific fact.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Orwell
We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
timatoe is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 06:28 PM   #69
Yucca-man
Registered User
2004 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brighton, CO
Posts: 1,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireman4X4 View Post
On my current department, it is SOP to not operate the apparatus any more than 10 mph over the posted limit. Regardless of the call. Whether it is a confirmed structure fire with occupants trapped, or a false alarm at the grocery store.
Of course, your rig (whether it's a Medic, Engine, or Brush truck) doesn't quite have the handling and power that a Crown Vic will. Ten over can be beyond the capabilities of some of those vehicles, especially on the interstate. Crown Vics are good well beyond legal speed limits in any part of the country.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireman4X4 View Post
As for this specific case, I think 115 or whatever speed he was actually going might have been excessive. But again, this is just opinion from someone not trained the way the S.O. was. I live in a large county with a small population that is spread out from one border to the other. It is not uncommon to see LEO's and EMS driving at what seems must be warp speed. From what I have been told from these guys, it is because the time frame to get from one end of the county to the other is so narrow. Whatever...that can be a whole different can of worms.
That was the point I was beginning to bring up earlier. Let's not lose sight of the original call - the Deputy was responding to an intruder in a house. Like you said, a large rural county with low population density means the few law enforcement officers on duty need to get from one end of the county to the other, in no time.

When overtaking another vehicle while running code, you expect them to pull to the right and stop. At least, that's what they're supposed to do. You realize that they may continue driving like oblivious dorks the same way you're going, too. You really don't expect they will slow to the right and then make a left-hand turn in front of your grill though. Let's not forget that the speed limit was 55mph in that section. The Jeep had to slow before making the left, and to the deputy that's the action you would expect to see when overtaking - the Jeep slowing. That gives him a chance to look at the rest of the roadway for obstructions and hazards.

As for the discussion that "it was 5:30pm so it was rush hour" or whatever that was...this happened in a rural county of 20,000 people, without a major population center nearby. Rush hour traffic jam most likely occurs when Farmer Joe moves his herd from the pasture to the barn, across the road. Welcome to the country.
Yucca-man is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 06:49 PM   #70
little_Jeep
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by timatoe View Post
Feel free to quote where I EVER said the Deputy was oncoming traffic. It doesn't matter the direction of travel, the Jeep turned IN FRONT OF the Deputy.

BTW, little jeep I've gotten many convictions with zero driving observations (taillight out or whatever) with a BAC of .08. It's the limit in all 50 States, there's really no difference there. What a jury wants to see to convict and what the law states are two completely different things. If he was a .08 he was drunk, that's not an opinion it's a scientific fact.
I'll take you word for this... I am just trying to get the facts that have been printed (we don't know all the facts, we only know what we have found in print), posted in this thread.... so there isn't a which hunt one way or the other. This will be an interesting case. I suspect sooner or later, a Jury will decide if the Deputy's speed was excessive and what part, if any Mr. Johnson's consumption of alcohol played in this accident. It may never get to Court, once the investigation is done, and the County Attorney reviews the results, the Deputy maybe cleared right then and there, or it may go to a Grand Jury, and then on to Court. All this will workout in due time.
little_Jeep is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 06:59 PM   #71
CGrugger
Senior Member
 
CGrugger's Avatar
1985 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 816
I think the real question was if the road had the solid double yellows.... haha
__________________
85 CJ-7: 2 inch body lift, Weber Carb, 33 inch tires

07 WK Limited: 4.7, QT-II
CGrugger is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 07:16 PM   #72
wildlyle
Registered User
2012 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Groves, Texas
Posts: 65
As a former police officer who was involved in a high speed chase which ended in the death of an innocent person I feel the need to apply my two cents.

While the circumstances in my case were much different (the car which was being pursued was 1/4 mile ahead of us and ran a red light broadsided another vehicle and killed a mother of five.) The same rules will or should apply in this situation. Most likely the officer will be found somewhat responsible for the incident. However, he was acting under the color of authority and will probably not incur any sort of civil liability. In addition, if he is able to return to work (health and injuries permitting) he most likely will not be brought up on any type of criminal charges. With that being said he has enough guilt, self-doubt and stress to deal with relative to this incident. This department needs to review and probably revise its pursuit and response policy.

The family of the man killed should be compensated (IMO) for the death of a loved one. 115 mph on a public roadway is excessive. NO MATTER THE CIRCUMSTANCES! Turning on your lights and siren does not put an invisible force field around your cruiser. It does not matter if the other driver was drunk. It does not matter if he turned in front of the police.

I have had a police car pass me at 115 mph with the lights and siren going. Believe me when I say that the car was on top of me before I knew it.

I feel sorry for the family of the person killed. What a tragedy, probably a decent guy who had one too many. His judgement may, or may not have been impaired to the point that it is what cost him his life.

I pity the officer involved in this because I have lived what he is about to go through. It's not going to be nice.
wildlyle is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 08:51 PM   #73
TBailey
Registered User
1983 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pensacola,FL
Posts: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by timatoe

Not sure which facts aren't supported in my post you quoted??

Did the driver of the Jeep turn left in front of the oncoming Deputy? Yes
.
Well there it is quoted word for word.
TBailey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-08-2012, 09:02 PM   #74
TBailey
Registered User
1983 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pensacola,FL
Posts: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by timatoe
Feel free to quote where I EVER said the Deputy was oncoming traffic. It doesn't matter the direction of travel, the Jeep turned IN FRONT OF the Deputy.

BTW, little jeep I've gotten many convictions with zero driving observations (taillight out or whatever) with a BAC of .08. It's the limit in all 50 States, there's really no difference there. What a jury wants to see to convict and what the law states are two completely different things. If he was a .08 he was drunk, that's not an opinion it's a scientific fact.
Now I see,you are an leo. You also sound like one that thinks all leo's are above the law and are never in the wrong.
TBailey is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 02-09-2012, 12:51 AM   #75
timatoe
Registered User
1990 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Grass Valley California
Posts: 13,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBailey View Post
Well there it is quoted word for word.
Oops you got me on that one. They were traveling in the same direction, I should have said overtaking and didn't. That's the ONE point that you have to negate what I've said and it still doesn't change the FACT that the guy in the Jeep turned in front of the Deputy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBailey View Post
Now I see,you are an leo. You also sound like one that thinks all leo's are above the law and are never in the wrong.


I've never said LEO's are above the law and never said they are never in the wrong, on the contrary, I'd suggest you go back and re-read my first post in this thread. It was only after the FACT emerged that the dead guy was drunk that I gave an opinion. Then go ahead and fast forward a bit to where I again said the cop may or may not have needed to go that fast. I'm a purveyor of fact, regardless of who the people involved are.

You sound like that type that hates cops all cops no matter the circumstance. Regardless of that still doesn't make the facts any different.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Orwell
We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
timatoe is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.
Note: All free e-mails have been banned due to mis-use. (Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc.)
Don't have a non-free e-mail address? Click here for a solution: Manual Account Creation
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


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.