[ULVER]

The intersection Involved is right downtown, and is always busy. Wits claimed that although the GSP vehicle had lights and siren activated, he was traveling at a high rate of speed, and never slowed, before blowing the red light.

http://www.11alive.com/news/article/...-trainers-wife

I'm sure some of those 20 wrecks were minor, and 13 were apparently not his fault, but still...

[EMTCOP]

It appears that something like this was inevitable, given his driving history. A lot of agencies look closely at an applicant's driving record during the pre-employment background investigation, and for good reason.
If one can't act responsibly while operating a private vehicle, chances are
that one won't act responsibly when operating an emergency vehicle. I won't even address how irresponsible it would be to arm someone like this
with a firearm.

[collim1]

We have had a couple of guys get "assigned" to bike patrol just for this reason.

[vanilla_gorilla]

With seven at-fault accidents in ten years, this guy would have been looking for a new job long ago around here.

[4949shooter]

Twenty accidents since he was hired in 2002?

My guess is that the only reason he kept his job this long is because he, or his family, has ties with an influential person.

[steveksux]

Originally Posted by collim1

We have had a couple of guys get "assigned" to bike patrol just for this reason.

In MI, bikes still have to obey all traffic laws, are considered vehicles just like cars... just messing with you, I get what you were getting at..

Randy

[Roadkill_751]

Originally Posted by ULVER

The intersection Involved is right downtown, and is always busy. Wits claimed that although the GSP vehicle had lights and siren activated, he was traveling at a high rate of speed, and never slowed, before blowing the red light.

http://www.11alive.com/news/article/...-trainers-wife

I'm sure some of those 20 wrecks were minor, and 13 were apparently not his fault, but still...

I am sure if it wasn't a well known person he hit, the Trooper might have got him a new assignment way down in south Georgia. Just saying....

[Panzergrenadier1979]

Our chief has been rotating our officers thru EVOC over the past year. I was naive enough to be surprise to see most of the officers in the class were there for "punishment" after having wrecked a patrol car.

[merlynusn]

If we are involved in an accident that is determined to be our fault, we have to go through a driver training block which concentrates on what caused your accident. If you back into something, you spend a lot of time backing, etc.

If they have witnesses who say the car didn't even slow down for the red light, he's toast. I'd expect to see criminal charges of involuntary manslaughter come up. If he did show due regard, then I don't see any criminal charges and he'll just stay fired.

But yeah, 20 accidents in 10 years is a lot. Especially with 5 at fault accidents since 2008. Everyone is going to be in an accident at some time in their career.

[Morris]

With seven at-fault accidents in ten years, this guy would have been looking for a new job long ago around here.

Same here. In Washington, even on-duty collisions go on your driving because we had a couple of d-bags that were bad drivers, killing some folks and creating legislation.

[Patchman]

Originally Posted by Panzergrenadier1979

Our chief has been rotating our officers thru EVOC over the past year.

With us, people used to get sent to refresher EVOC only after an accident. Within the last year (?), supervisors are suppose to continually evaluate all their people's driving and where required, can send anyone for a refresher EVOC.

[Dragoon44]

Two at fault accidents in two days and he still had a job?

He must have been protected by the prince of darkness himself.

[vanilla_gorilla]

Originally Posted by Dragoon44

Two at fault accidents in two days and he still had a job?

I was working dispatch for the Sheriff's Office several years ago. One of the shift sgts was sitting in there BSing with us when her phone rang. One of the particularly bad drivers had backed into a culvert. [facepalm]

She had him on speakerphone and we were all laughin in the background, but he was so scared that he didn't have a clue. He asked, "Are you going to recommend they fire me this time, sarge?" She never missed a beat. "They didn't fire you the last time I recommended you be fired. Why would this time be any different?"

[4949shooter]

Originally Posted by Dragoon44

Two at fault accidents in two days and he still had a job?

He must have been protected by the prince of darkness himself.

The prince has some serious pull.

[9jeeps]

Was this Wreck on Wheels, one of those 'Good Ole Boys'?

[G27Chief]

Let's say I was hesitant to read this thread, however curiosity got the best of me. This Trooper is a close personal friend of mine, and he and his family are going through pure hell right now.

He does not have "connections" in the old boy network. He as a matter of fact, he worked his way up to priority 1 in the last Corporal assessment. This in spite if past discipline for accidents, the details of which I do not recall enough about to elaborate.

I will not hazard a guess as to the outcome of this, and am not knowledgeable in Donald's punishments in the disciplinary history. I am awaiting the final investigative report. I am only wondering if the high amount of activity in Atlanta could have reference to the the number of collisions were results of chases and them comming to abrupt ending by violator crashing, etc. He is my friend, and I feel obligated not to add to the speculation, and damnation of the media, as I would for any friend.

This is tragic, for all the Porter's, as well as the Crozier family, and I will continue to pray for all.

[Wonder140]

You wouldn't last past maybe 3 at faults at my agency. The brass think there is absolutely no reason for an at fault accident...none. I would tend to agree. Not at fault is different though. You can't control others driving. I have been lucky and never been in an accident on our off duty. Knock on wood lol.

I would agree with 4949 in that he probably has some ties with someone for this to have not at the very least put him behind a desk. This guy has liability written all over and I'm really surprised that he is still driving an agency vehicle.

[phuzz01]

I personally do not put a lot of stock in the "# of accidents" in a personnel file. First, if he was not at fault in thirteen of them, I do not see how can you possibly hold any of those against him. My last cruiser accident, I was parked in the driveway of a suspect, collecting my case file and notebook for an interview. All of a sudden, the garage door opens, and his teenaged brother backs out of the garage without looking right into the side of my cruiser. I don't think that says anything about my driving skills, yet it is in my personnel file as a cruiser accident.

For the ones that were at fault, I am more interested in the circumstances than the number. If he had multiple crashes that were a result of unreasonable speed or not stopping at red lights, that is one thing. But at my agency, you get an at fault cruiser accident if you ding your side view mirror while backing into your garage or a deer runs into the road in front of you.

[G27Chief]

A little public update on this story. Please keep all the families in your prayers, this is tragic for many.

http://www.walb.com/story/16486358/p...knaHk.facebook

[Kadetklapp]

Sorry to hear that Chief. However, the fact remains that this guy was reckless. Two at-fault collisions in two days? Why was he still employed? This guy at a minimum should have been riding a desk. That **** can't fly.

[merlynusn]

They count PIT maneuvers as accidents??

Do they count them as at fault too? How stupid is that?

If his accidents are a lot of PIT maneuvers, that changes things (with regard to how many he has).

[Dukeboy01]

The 13 accidents that are not his fault don't matter. Period. The media bringing them up as part of their coverage is yellow journalism at it's worst.

I'd have to know the details of the other seven before making any judgements. Patrol officers spend approximately 40 hours a week driving around in a cockpit overrun with driving distractions. Between the MDC, the police radio, the regular stereo, the RADAR display, and the occasional whacked out methhead in the backseat trying to kick out the rear windows sheetmetal is going to get bent.

At certain times police officers are called upon to drive in a manner that no amount of training can ever make completely safe. The general public is not only expected to not engage in similar manuevers, but are prohibited by law from engaging in them under any circumstances. When the weather is crappy and the general public is told to stay home and avoid all unneccessary travel, police officers are out there sliding around in the wind, rain, sleet, and/ or snow.

As far as I'm concerned, saying that a guy has had seven at- fault collisions doesn't mean anything to me until you tell me the circumstances of each collision.

[Dukeboy01]

Originally Posted by phuzz01

I personally do not put a lot of stock in the "# of accidents" in a personnel file. First, if he was not at fault in thirteen of them, I do not see how can you possibly hold any of those against him. My last cruiser accident, I was parked in the driveway of a suspect, collecting my case file and notebook for an interview. All of a sudden, the garage door opens, and his teenaged brother backs out of the garage without looking right into the side of my cruiser. I don't think that says anything about my driving skills, yet it is in my personnel file as a cruiser accident.

For the ones that were at fault, I am more interested in the circumstances than the number. If he had multiple crashes that were a result of unreasonable speed or not stopping at red lights, that is one thing. But at my agency, you get an at fault cruiser accident if you ding your side view mirror while backing into your garage or a deer runs into the road in front of you.

Originally Posted by merlynusn

They count PIT maneuvers as accidents??

Do they count them as at fault too? How stupid is that?

If his accidents are a lot of PIT maneuvers, that changes things (with regard to how many he has).

Exactly. If his agency is counting PIT manuevers as at- fault collisions then if I was an officer there I would never PIT another car again as long as I worked for them, even if Charlie Manson was driving it.

[alexanderg23]

time to go to jail

[Kadetklapp]

Originally Posted by Dukeboy01

Exactly. If his agency is counting PIT manuevers as at- fault collisions then if I was an officer there I would never PIT another car again as long as I worked for them, even if Charlie Manson was driving it.

Word.