Cop Drives Distracted, Kills Biker, Will Not Be Charged

[Korgoth]

I think it's called "moving the goalposts". Every time you almost score they mysteriously shift

Alright find the section of the legal code that makes any accident involving a car in a bike lane a crime, or drop that retarded line of reasoning.

Goalpost didn't move, you just are choosing to aim for the 50 yrd line.

[Sarcon]

I see cops texting and driving all the time. I've also seen them turn their lights on the get through a red light only to turn it off just seconds after. In my home town they just sit around in parking lots on their laptops.

[Rixis]

OK then, how does one accidentally drift lanes and run someone down?

[PessimiStick]

Goalpost didn't move, you just are choosing to aim for the 50 yrd line.

Any accident that occurs in a bike lane is, by default, a crime, barring the 3 listed exceptions from the statute. That's why we linked the statute in the first place.

"Road rule says no driving in bike lane... therefore any accident in a bike lane is a crime!" C'mon.

That is literally what we're saying. That's how laws work.

[Korgoth]

OK then, how does one accidentally drift lanes and run someone down?

Now I have to explain how automobile accidents can occur? You people are fucking unreal, Ill leave to your anti cop hatemongering circle jerk.

[Rixis]

Now I have to explain how automobile accidents can occur? You people are fucking unreal, Ill leave to your anti cop hatemongering circle jerk.

Yes, please do.

There was nothing in the road he swerved. To drift lanes he must have been driving at the very least without due care and attention.

Most if not all circumstances related to an accident would have been mentioned in the article. Tyre burst, someone stepped into the road, other car fault or whatever.

Explain it, or disappear cursing at us.

[Barnabas]

No you are assuming he was distracted while driving, and in a way that is illegal.

If he had a hands free system, and the text was something like "ok", then it is obviously not going to cause a major distraction. Furthermore if the accident is around the corner of the road shown in the image then it creates another plausible reason why the accident occurred.

But no you just want to rail road him because he is a cop, actual evidence be damned.

It doesn't matter if he was sucking on a lollipop while driving. He broke the law.

21760. (c) A driver of a motor vehicle shall not overtake or pass a bicycle proceeding in the same direction on a highway at a distance of less than three feet between any part of the motor vehicle and any part of the bicycle or its operator.
(d) If the driver of a motor vehicle is unable to comply with subdivision (c), due to traffic or roadway conditions, the driver shall slow to a speed that is reasonable and prudent, and may pass only when doing so would not endanger the safety of the operator of the bicycle, taking into account the size and speed of the motor vehicle and bicycle, traffic conditions, weather, visibility, and surface and width of the highway.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...le=21750-21760

edit: The date of repeal hasn't passed yet so it's still active.

[Jordaen]

Now I have to explain how automobile accidents can occur? You people are fucking unreal, Ill leave to your anti cop hatemongering circle jerk.

Just because it's an accident it's not automatically legal. People who are turning into on coming traffic (right turn in US) are legally allowed to do so...until you accidentally don't see the car that's coming. That car hits you, and now you are in an accident. You are still responsible for the accident - meaning you have to pay any insurance fees, and handle any tickets that come your way (driving without a license, reckless driving, driving while intoxicated blah blah blah). Just because you didn't mean to do it doesn't mean you get to get off scott free. That's why everyone is saying he should be charged with manslaughter which is below murder. Murder implies you MEANT to do it, while manslaughter is what happens when it's an ACCIDENT or there was no intent to kill.

What is so hard to understand about this? Really? Not trolling, I want to understand why you think everyone is just trying to drag the cop through the mud when he obviously broke the law by striking a biker in the bike lane, which has been proven to be against the law. If he was texting, that's a whole different issue. This particular point in the story is very hard to dispute because the biker was hit. In the bike lane. Which is illegal. It doesn't matter if it was accidental, it's still against the law and he should be tried for manslaughter. The texting thing would be added on top of the manslaughter if it's found that he was indeed texting while driving and it would add another charge against him.

[Symphonic]

Now I have to explain how automobile accidents can occur? You people are fucking unreal, Ill leave to your anti cop hatemongering circle jerk.

Please explain your defense of this cop. It's not like he swerved to miss a raccoon in the road and accidentally went into the bike lane. He was not paying attention to his own driving and went into the bike lane for no other reason than being distracted (aka not looking at the road). If he had been looking at the road, do you think he would have driven into the bike lane?

[Trassk]

oh look, yet another cop story of a coppa getting off with killing a man with no repercussions.

Maybe more people should be cops so the number of arrestable offenses can be brushed aside too.

[grandpab]

He should be demoted to a bike cop.

[spinner981]

In other news, hundreds of people die due to various forms of manslaughter, but this one case is most important to push the agenda that cops are bad and anything that any cop does that is remotely wrong should definitely be attributed to an alleged police state or something.

Somebody died and its a shame, but why is it that 90% of these kinds of posts seem to always be targeting police officers and never the other 90% of people who commit manslaughter in one way or another that get off the hook?

Is there some sort of computer program that scans the internet for articles that make specifically police officers look bad or something?

[Jordaen]

In other news, hundreds of people die due to various forms of manslaughter, but this one case is most important to push the agenda that cops are bad and anything that any cop does that is remotely wrong should definitely be attributed to an alleged police state or something.

Somebody died and its a shame, but why is it that 90% of these kinds of posts seem to always be targeting police officers and never the other 90% of people who commit manslaughter in one way or another that get off the hook?

Because if the people that are supposed to uphold the law and be examples for their communities can get off with a slap on the wrist for things that ordinary people would get punished for, where does it stop? I'm aware that there are many more good/decent cops out there than the bad ones, but the bad ones bring to light serious problems in the way cops are treated if they break laws. They shouldn't be above the law. They should enforce it and that's it.

[Phookah]

No you are assuming he was distracted while driving, and in a way that is illegal.

If he had a hands free system, and the text was something like "ok", then it is obviously not going to cause a major distraction. Furthermore if the accident is around the corner of the road shown in the image then it creates another plausible reason why the accident occurred.

But no you just want to rail road him because he is a cop, actual evidence be damned.

He hit someone. And wasn't aware he did until shortly after.
That right there is proof, regardless of texts/whatever. Do you make a habit of hitting people while paying attention to the road?

[Tock20]

I'm sure there will be a civil suit if legal charges aren't applied. Not great, but at least it will go to some form of court.

[Themius]

In other news, hundreds of people die due to various forms of manslaughter, but this one case is most important to push the agenda that cops are bad and anything that any cop does that is remotely wrong should definitely be attributed to an alleged police state or something.

Somebody died and its a shame, but why is it that 90% of these kinds of posts seem to always be targeting police officers and never the other 90% of people who commit manslaughter in one way or another that get off the hook?

Is there some sort of computer program that scans the internet for articles that make specifically police officers look bad or something?

Civilians hitting people while distracted generally leads to charges being filed.

Why shouldn't a distracted cop who kills someone also be treated the same? This isn't something to make cops look bad, it's just more proof that cops sometimes are above the law.

[Barnabas]

In other news, hundreds of people die due to various forms of manslaughter, but this one case is most important to push the agenda that cops are bad and anything that any cop does that is remotely wrong should definitely be attributed to an alleged police state or something.

Somebody died and its a shame, but why is it that 90% of these kinds of posts seem to always be targeting police officers and never the other 90% of people who commit manslaughter in one way or another that get off the hook?

Is there some sort of computer program that scans the internet for articles that make specifically police officers look bad or something?

Because this one involves a police officer. In reality about 3 out of 4 drivers that strike bicyclists never get charged at all. Most of what I've seen is just traffic offenses but rarely manslaughter. That is mostly due to police attitudes towards bicyclists as automatically being at fault. So they end up not pursuing much of investigation or not at all. The DA's don't push for manslaughter either in cases. Don't think the other "90%" of cases don't have grieving families and a shocked public included either. Maybe the attitude you see present in these threads is the fact that police officers have constantly been in the news lately from shooting black kids to beating women on the side of the road. In most if not all cases the officer is never charged for any type of crime. So it creates this "illusion" that they are infallible and can't be prosecuted.

[Nekosom]

Now I have to explain how automobile accidents can occur? You people are fucking unreal, Ill leave to your anti cop hatemongering circle jerk.

Korgoth, I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here. It started off as a "let's not jump to conclusions" (which I agree with) to "breaking traffic laws doesn't count if it's an accident." "Accident" is what makes something involuntary manslaughter instead of murder. Now, if you're trying to argue that there could be some unknown factor at play, then alright. That is a possibility that news stories simply could have missed or ignored, and is perfectly valid. However, if there wasn't a legitimate factor outside of his control, then it is irrelevant whether he was texting while driving, dozed off, or got distracted reading someone's bumper sticker. It's still a crime. Arguing against that is just factually wrong.

[Drsolders]

I'm so glad this whole forum has turned into an anti-police circle jerk recently. Hey guys lets search the internet for anything ever about cops doing bad things (the small % who do) and then post them all and then claim that is everyone of them. This whole forum is becoming a joke.

[PessimiStick]

I'm so glad this whole forum has turned into an anti-police circle jerk recently. Hey guys lets search the internet for anything ever about cops doing bad things (the small % who do) and then post them all and then claim that is everyone of them. This whole forum is becoming a joke.

Let me know when the rest of the cops stop defending the ones who commit crimes, and then we can stop talking about it.