Aleksandr   10 #145 Posted April 29, 2012 So the police should drive slowly all the time in case an idiot runs in front of them. I'm guessing you don't drive if you think it's always possible to stop when the unexpected happens. I didn't say that. They need to drive in such a manner as to not make things worse. What's the point in catching a burglar if you kill a child to get there! The speed and manner of driving need to be appropriate. On some roads, that would mean say 80mph might be okay at certain times, 20mph at others. It depends on what the driver can see and how he/she can prepare for the unexpected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Aleksandr   10 #146 Posted April 29, 2012 There is no evidence to suggest that it hasn't been this time.Apart from the fact that a Police officer has got off scot-free after killing a pedestrian whilst speeding. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
AbdullaJones   10 #147 Posted April 29, 2012 Apart from the fact that a Police officer has got off scot-free after killing a pedestrian whilst speeding.  Its the law of the land. A coppers job is worth more than a kids life Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
bongo_fish   10 #148 Posted April 29, 2012 If it would have been anyone else they would have got life its disgusting Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
AbdullaJones   10 #149 Posted April 29, 2012 If it would have been anyone else they would have got life its disgusting  Its fine. It was only a member of the public who died. A young man with his whole life in front of him. It really isnt all that important. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #150 Posted April 29, 2012 Apart from the fact that a Police officer has got off scot-free after killing a pedestrian whilst speeding.  Are you saying that the trial wasn't fair or that the jury was tampered with, those are serious allegations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #151 Posted April 29, 2012 Worth it then dont you agree? Slowing down i mean. No. It's a balance to strike, how much harm would be done by the police not being able to speed?  What was the emergency exactly? You must already know to be commenting on the issue.   Some one died. Id say thats wrong and unusual It's unfortunate, but a jury has determined that it wasn't the officers fault.  No, I'm not mixing you up at all, you're not interested in the evidence, you're not interested in that due process was followed you just keep repeating an allegation that you can't substantiate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #152 Posted April 29, 2012 What makes you think it werent? By the by, i have personally known police to maipulate evidence, lie in statements, coerse witnesses and victims all in the name of protecting their own. Its called corruption and its rife. This masn died at the hands of the law and the law walks free once again. We are on a slippery slope.  There we go, axe to grind, not interested in what actually happened in this case. You've been quite obvious all along. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #153 Posted April 29, 2012 Apart from the fact that a Police officer has got off scot-free after killing a pedestrian whilst speeding. Speeding in the course of his duty, as the police are entitled to do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
denlin   12 #154 Posted April 29, 2012 Apart from the fact that a Police officer has got off scot-free after killing a pedestrian whilst speeding.  But he wasn't a pedestrian was he, he was effectively jay walking, his friend admitted he tried to beat a speeding car by running in front of it so therefore he was in the road. Not condoning speeding but let's get some perspective here Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
redfox   10 #155 Posted April 29, 2012 I think this thread has run its course. There are those who continually post with a plain axe to grind irrespective of the evidence in this case -that they do not know the full details of because they were not in court -and spout its a police officer and he's been acquitted when he should not.  The man was prosecuted - and note not for dangerous driving and I am not about to tell you what the legal definition of that is you can look for yourself. The case was heard by a Judge and Jury. Witnesses gave evidence and were no doubt cross-examined. The jury came to a conclusion. That is our system and it applies to everyone just the same as it does police officers.  What more can the system do ?- Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Aleksandr   10 #156 Posted April 29, 2012 Speeding in the course of his duty, as the police are entitled to do.Not without due care and attention! We have irresolvable differences on this, so I'm going to do something more interesting. Bye. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...