Pedestrian killed in collision with police car

[cytine 40]

When my husband worked for one of the emergency services, they were not allowed to use sirens after a certain time, 2200hrs I think. But this may have changed now.

[Aleksandr 10]

Just one question: PC Mills had an hour to respond, yet he drove at nearly double the speed limit. How fast do Forum members think he would have driven to attend a real emergency? Three times the speed limit? Four?

[Aleksandr 10]

Good grief, it's 00:30 - no wonder no one's replying! I bet you're all in bed, or staggering back from a night out in town. If so, hope you got back all right. Not everyone does, apparently.

[bigjoker 10]

Really? What about driving without lights and siren? That fact alone proves responsibility IMO.

 

Well obviously the Crown Prosecution Service thought there was a case to answer or it would'nt have gone to trial. But some forum members seem to think they are legal experts and know better. He was tried by jury and was found not guilty. But just how many times as a jury been wrong with a verdict in the past.

Edited April 27, 2012 by bigjoker

[HeadingNorth 11]

The officer should have had lights and sirens on, and there can be no rational debate about that!

 

A rational debate, no, since you've decided in advance what your conclusions will be.

 

The fact of the matter is that police are not required to use lights and sirens at all times when they are exceeding the speed limit.

[HeadingNorth 11]

Just one question: PC Mills had an hour to respond, yet he drove at nearly double the speed limit.

 

He believed it was an emergency, not merely a priority; hence his driving at emergency speeds.

 

Perhaps if you read the details of the incident before commenting, you would already have the facts right?

[Cyclone 10]

Good grief, it's 00:30 - no wonder no one's replying! I bet you're all in bed, or staggering back from a night out in town. If so, hope you got back all right. Not everyone does, apparently.

 

The chances of getting back are reduced by playing chicken, or so I heard.

[Cyclone 10]

Really? What about driving without lights and siren? That fact alone proves responsibility IMO.

 

Clearly it doesn't otherwise the jury would have found him guilty very quickly. We all know that sirens at night are annoying, and it's quite reasonable for the police to make a judgement call on using them or not.

 

What makes you think that the person playing chicken wouldn't have been hit if sirens and lights were on?

[redfox 10]

Incidents involving police officers who it is decided (by the CPS from an area outside that which the officer works in) should be charged are then sent to a court centre (outside which the officer works in)

 

It is the norm for SYP officers who are prosecuted to be sent off to Leeds or Bradford for trial - not for reasons as suggested earlier concerning the likely constitution of the jury.

 

It is fortunate that the prejudice displayed towards the police -for whatever reason-is not allowed to colour the judgement of the jury.

 

Where there has been a loss of life and you are on the jury I believe you would give the evidence the most thorough consideration, and not apply bias - a member of the police force would not in this case be permitted to serve on a jury but in other cases they are now permitted to do so, as are judges!

 

Unless you know all the evidence that was presented then basing an opinion on headlines and snippets coupled with a rather slanted view of the police is not going to get you far. In this case we do not know all the evidence and I for one am not going to express any view as to the rights and wrongs without all the available evidence - because that is how you make a proper decision on a desperate situation for all involved.

[Lucifer 10]

I don't know, why are you?

 

He is alive and the dead one is'n't, how many witnesses do you need. ?

[irenewilde 10]

I'm guessing that they chose Bradford for the trial, because Jamie Haslett had been drinking, and there is a high percentage of people in Bradford who consider drinking to be sinful on religious grounds, and therefore, one would presume, must consider Jamie Haslett to deserve his death.

 

That is just plain mad.

[Squiggs 11]

According to Radio Sheffield, the friend who was with him said ' you won't get accross before the police car' but he replied ' i can' and ran across the road, so it would seem he did see it.

 

OK, let's take that theory and first look at the visibility from the point of collision.

 

Then let's play that conversation, say 5 seconds

 

Then let's do the maths, 5 seconsd at 58mph , approx 28.95metres/second

 

That means at the start of the conversation the car is 144.75 metres away. Unlikely the police car was even noticed at the beginning of that supposed 5 second conversation