Should this trooper be fired?

"L Sternn" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 08:10:02 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>
>>>> I guess we'd have to put it into perspective then. His inaction was
>>>> not
>>>> to
>>>> deliberately kill someone. He had no idea the extent of the injuries,
>>>> nor
>>>> were the injuries his fault. The guy could've died no matter what
>>>> anyone
>>>> did which is pretty much what happened. At the most his inaction
>>>> would've
>>>> delayed emergency response by the time it takes to make 3 phone calls
>>>> but
>>>> his bosses were quoted as saying there was no delay.
>>>
>>> You're a police officer, yet you seem strangely unfamiliar with the
>>> concept of negligent homicide.
>>
>>The fact that I am a police officer makes me very familiar with the
>>concept.
>>For a homicide charge in most states I am familiar with, the person has to
>>_cause_ the death of a person in one form or another be it through direct
>>or
>>indirect actions. The mere fact that he neither caused nor had anything
>>to
>>do with the injuries in the collision makes that statue not applicable to
>>this incident.
>
> I'd feel much more confident that the officer's actiosn didn't
> contribute to his death if it were DOCTORS saying it didn't matter
> instead of cops.

I get the feeling there isn't much that would make you more confident about
cops at all.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

"L Sternn" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:49:49 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>
>>>
>>> The point is that you are excusing negligent behaviour -- behaviour that
>>> *could* have resulted in someone's death.
>>
>>No, I'm not excusing it at all. I don't believe it resulted in a death,
>>but
>>it was inappropriate and he was disciplined for it.
>>
>>>
>>> He *hung up* on a 911 caller, where someone's *life* was on the line;
>>> literally.
>>
>>Yes he did. That action does not constitute negligent homicide which is
>>what we were discussing in this post.
>
> Of course, we only have the lay opinion of other cops - not a medical
> opinion.

Holy crap, so now you're wanting an autopsy done on the poor guy... Well,
knock yourself out.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

jaybird wrote:

> "L Sternn" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:49:49 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>The point is that you are excusing negligent behaviour -- behaviour that
>>>>*could* have resulted in someone's death.
>>>
>>>No, I'm not excusing it at all. I don't believe it resulted in a death,
>>>but
>>>it was inappropriate and he was disciplined for it.
>>>
>>>
>>>>He *hung up* on a 911 caller, where someone's *life* was on the line;
>>>>literally.
>>>
>>>Yes he did. That action does not constitute negligent homicide which is
>>>what we were discussing in this post.
>>
>>Of course, we only have the lay opinion of other cops - not a medical
>>opinion.
>
>
> Holy crap, so now you're wanting an autopsy done on the poor guy... Well,
> knock yourself out.
>

actually I don't think it makes any difference in this case - because
the cop couldn't possibly have known whether the incident was already
inevitably fatal at the time.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

"Nate Nagel" > wrote in message
...
> jaybird wrote:
>
>> "L Sternn" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:49:49 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The point is that you are excusing negligent behaviour -- behaviour
>>>>>that
>>>>>*could* have resulted in someone's death.
>>>>
>>>>No, I'm not excusing it at all. I don't believe it resulted in a death,
>>>>but
>>>>it was inappropriate and he was disciplined for it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>He *hung up* on a 911 caller, where someone's *life* was on the line;
>>>>>literally.
>>>>
>>>>Yes he did. That action does not constitute negligent homicide which is
>>>>what we were discussing in this post.
>>>
>>>Of course, we only have the lay opinion of other cops - not a medical
>>>opinion.
>>
>>
>> Holy crap, so now you're wanting an autopsy done on the poor guy...
>> Well, knock yourself out.
>>
>
> actually I don't think it makes any difference in this case - because the
> cop couldn't possibly have known whether the incident was already
> inevitably fatal at the time.

Yeah, that was pretty much my point too. )

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 19:46:47 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:

>> I'd feel much more confident that the officer's actiosn didn't
>> contribute to his death if it were DOCTORS saying it didn't matter
>> instead of cops.
>
>I get the feeling there isn't much that would make you more confident about
>cops at all.


Then again, you're just an idiot lowlife.

Fortunately, not all cops are like you.

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:37:44 -0500, Nate Nagel >
wrote:

>jaybird wrote:
>
>> "L Sternn" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:49:49 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>The point is that you are excusing negligent behaviour -- behaviour that
>>>>>*could* have resulted in someone's death.
>>>>
>>>>No, I'm not excusing it at all. I don't believe it resulted in a death,
>>>>but
>>>>it was inappropriate and he was disciplined for it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>He *hung up* on a 911 caller, where someone's *life* was on the line;
>>>>>literally.
>>>>
>>>>Yes he did. That action does not constitute negligent homicide which is
>>>>what we were discussing in this post.
>>>
>>>Of course, we only have the lay opinion of other cops - not a medical
>>>opinion.
>>
>>
>> Holy crap, so now you're wanting an autopsy done on the poor guy... Well,
>> knock yourself out.
>>
>
>actually I don't think it makes any difference in this case - because
>the cop couldn't possibly have known whether the incident was already
>inevitably fatal at the time.
>

That's true - a point which jaybird refuses to concede, but if his
inaction did lead to death, then he should not only be fired, but he
should be charged criminally.

>nate

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 22:47:20 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:

>
>"Nate Nagel" > wrote in message
...
>> jaybird wrote:
>>
>>> "L Sternn" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:49:49 GMT, "jaybird" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>The point is that you are excusing negligent behaviour -- behaviour
>>>>>>that
>>>>>>*could* have resulted in someone's death.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, I'm not excusing it at all. I don't believe it resulted in a death,
>>>>>but
>>>>>it was inappropriate and he was disciplined for it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>He *hung up* on a 911 caller, where someone's *life* was on the line;
>>>>>>literally.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes he did. That action does not constitute negligent homicide which is
>>>>>what we were discussing in this post.
>>>>
>>>>Of course, we only have the lay opinion of other cops - not a medical
>>>>opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>> Holy crap, so now you're wanting an autopsy done on the poor guy...
>>> Well, knock yourself out.
>>>
>>
>> actually I don't think it makes any difference in this case - because the
>> cop couldn't possibly have known whether the incident was already
>> inevitably fatal at the time.
>
>Yeah, that was pretty much my point too. )

Is it?

Parse Nate's words carefully.

Your point seems to be that the cop was merely "rude".

Nate recognizes that the cop could very well have killed someone by
his failure to act

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:19:07 -0700, L Sternn > wrote:

>>> actually I don't think it makes any difference in this case - because the
>>> cop couldn't possibly have known whether the incident was already
>>> inevitably fatal at the time.
>>
>>Yeah, that was pretty much my point too. )
>
>Is it?
>
>Parse Nate's words carefully.
>
>Your point seems to be that the cop was merely "rude".
>
>Nate recognizes that the cop could very well have killed someone by
>his failure to act

Actually, "failure to act" is not entirely accurate. If he had failed
to answer the phone, that would have been "failure to act".

But he did in fact take action by hanging up once he found out it was
a motorcycle rider who had been hurt.

Greek Shipping Magnets > wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 01:26:35 GMT, Charles Soto
> > wrote:
>
>
> >LOL. I gotta remember that one. I almost had to ride home lidless
> >today, because I lost my keys! Sure, I have a spare to El Guapo in my
> >wallet. But not for the Givi bag, where my lid sleeps while I'm away.
> >Doh! Gotta get me a spare to keep in my drawer at work...
>
>
> Like a dearly departed relative once said... Keys are to keep the
> owner's head comfortable. They don't do a damn thing to foil a thief!


Well, I *did* manage to take the last Givi lock out with a screwdriver.
But, that was in my garage. On a weekend. Not in the garage at work,
without my tools...

Charles

--
Charles Soto - Austin, TX *** 1999 GSF1200S, DoD No. "uno"

("Meepmeep" is "rr," as in Roadrunner, my ISP.)

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:49:08 GMT, "Bo Raxo"
> wrote:

>
>"Bob Mann" > wrote in message
.. .
>>
>> It depends if the dispatcher was police or ambulance.
>> Sending the cops to a serious accident isn't going to help save any
>> lives.
>
>Modern E-911 systems track the locations and status of all first responsers
>(police, medical, fire), allowing the dispatcher to request any or all
>resources the call requires. For a crash, I would assume the 911 operator
>would dispatch both police and medics.
>
>> Usually there would be a public enquiry and any discipline would arise
>> out of that.
>
>Usually there is a non-public enquiry within the agency. The one that is
>facing a potential lawsuit. Every incentive exists to minimize any
>wrongdoing.
>
>It's possible in some places a civilian review board might look at it, but I
>seriously doubt it. Those are used for officer misconduct hearings and
>investigations in to officer-involved shootings. Something like 911
>dispatch would be investigated by the police or by some internal city or
>county bureaucracy.
>
>
>
Of course, all this would lead one to agree that a regular
qualified911 specialist should ne answering the calls.
--
Bob Mann

Before you critisize someone,
you should walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you critisize them,
you're a mile away and you have their shoes.