Question for law enforcement people

[mwechtal]

Since It seems that we have a few retired police officers here, I'd like to ask your opinion.

I had an auto accident. I was following a police officer, as it turned out, he was responding to an accident. He pulled off the road, and I waited for a short while before proceeding. I saw that he was doing something with a clipboard. So, I proceeded. At just that time, he hung a u-turn obviously without checking his blind spot. I was unable to stop in time. I hit him just about at the front edge of the driver side door. I left about a 1 foot skid mark, and the air bag didn't deploy. He called his supervisor, and I was charged with failing to yield to an emergency vehicle.

My lawyer said that if he didn't use his siren he wasn't driving an emergency vehicle. At first my insurance company refused to pay for the police vehicle. After 9 months of wrangling, my lawyer finally got the charge down to parking on the pavement, and a $90 fine. Plus what I considered a very reasonable $300 for the lawyer. I really wanted to go to court, but that was going to cost a few thousand by the time it was all over.

So, what do you think?
Mike

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Real simple, if the cop's red lights were on, flashing, or rotating, you're screwed cause he's an Emergency Vehicle.
If his lights weren't on, you drove into a vehicle making an illegal U turn.
The definition of quick police thinking is turning the lights on just as you realize the police car is about to be impacted, regardless of what stupid move you just made.
BTW, you need a new lawyer, any one worth a flat dam would have pled you out for an inadequit muffler, cause in NY, the locality keeps the entire fine for that charge. Your lawyer charged you $300 for hanging the financial liability on you.
What was his name, U Ben Hadd?

 

[mwechtal]

Well, I believe the officer hit the lights just as he floored it and whipped in front of me. But since he didn't hit the siren he wasn't an emergency vehicle. The lawyer showed me the law on this one, and it was pretty clear to me.

The lawyer really worked for his money. I was there a few times when he tried to deal with the assistant DA. He apparently can't do ANYTHING without talking to the DA. You should be warned that in this area there is a big push to use traffic fines as a money making enterprise. It's really impossible to deal with them.
Mike

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Here's a little secret the public isn't supposed to know; All V&T fines collected in NY outside of citys with traffic enforcment bureaus for anything other than inadequit muffler goes to the STATE, and the state kicks back $7.00 to the municipality for court administration costs.
The Town of Irondequoit built a new Police/Court building on money collected by reducing speeding and other cases to muffler or littering.
The reason the ADA and his boss didn't want to reduce the charge was so your insurance company could pay for all damage to the police car.
You really didn't think justice was involved, did you? That statue wears a blindfold so she can't see what a prostitute the system has turned her into.

 

[shado]

I'm no lawman, but I've seen a few cases presented here & there, so here's what I think...
No driver has the right to pull out in front of another vehicle if it's not a safe manuever. What you failed to mention in your post is at what state were the emergency lights were at prior to making contact with the officer's vehicle, on or off? If he had his lights flashing while 'working with a clipboard,' then you would have had the duty to watch out for his actions since the flashing lights are a warning to surrounding motorist that the area is under emergency jurishdiction. But if you were already alongside the officer's vehicle & he turned on his lights & moved at the same time, then he did not provide any warning of an emergency status. He does not have to turn on a siren at any given moment, officers respond to calls turning a siren OFF as they approach an area that originated the call as not to alert whatever perpertrators may be present of the officer's arrival. But the bottom line is in most instance's, no one has the right to make an un-safe manuever, the officer in an emergency status has the right-of-way when responding to calls or situations. But I never known anything in NY to set right with the rest of the nation anyhows.

 

[Bird]

Mike, in my opinion:

There's no way a retired (or active) law enforcement officer (or anyone else) on this forum could second guess the lawyers, court, and/or insurance company without a great deal more information than you can provide in this forum, without hearing both sides, and without a good working knowledge of New York law (both statutory and judicial interpretations).

So unfortunately I think all you can get here are emotional responses and regardless of what those might be, or which side they might take, they can't help or change your current situation.

Based strictly on what you said in your original post, in my department the officer would have been charged with the accident but there are too many unasnswered questions for this to be considered a valid opinion.

 

[Chuck52]

Darn it all, Bird. There you go being reasonable again. You're just no fun at all.

Chuck

 

[dmccarty]

I think Bird said it best. And based on what you said I THINK
that in NC the officer would have been charged as well but...

There is always a but. There was a case in Raleigh a few
years ago where an officer was running to a call with at least
lights, I can't remember if the siren was on, when he looked
down to adjust his radio. When he looked up the traffic in
front of him at stopped and he rear ended another car.

No one was seriously hurt. The women who was hit thought
that the city should pay for the damages, I don't remember
if she had insurance or not, but the city said no way we have
immunity. And the last I heard the city did not pay even
though the officer hit the other car.

To complicated for me! /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Later,
Dan

 

[Bird]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( city said no way we have immunity. )</font>

Dan, you're opening another whole can of worms. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Governmental immunity used to be common. I don't know about other state laws, but when I started on the police department, the city had immunity and was not liable for the acts of individual employees (and I won't go into the possible exceptions), so we were told all about that in the academy. If an officer were at fault in an accident, the victim could collect from that individual officer, but not the city. Therefore, most, if not all, officers carried their own liability insurance (state law did not require liability insurance back then either, as it does now). Most of us simply got a "rider" on our own auto insurance to cover us driving "emergency vehicles", although you could also buy a separate policy. When the state law changed so that the victim of an accident could collect from the city, a lot of officers quit carrying their own liability insurance since the city usually paid; however, some like myself, continued to carry that insurance because the reality is that a person can sue either the individual or the city or both.

So I paid for that insurance all those years and never had a claim to be paid by either the city or my insurance /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif but I guess it was worth it for the peace of mind. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[mwechtal]

Bird,
Yeah, you're right. I can't really provide all the information that's required. I posted out of frustration mostly, I guess.

Frankly I don't know exactly when he turned his flashers on. Due to the position of the two vehicles his flashers were over my head and blocked by the right front corner of my roof. It's hard to explain without a drawing. I had started moving, and was definately in his blind spot when he gassed it to make a u-turn, and slide into a gap in the traffic. I just wish that our state allowed jury trials for traffic cases. I'm pretty sure the DA would have wanted to deal then.

The frustrating thing is that if I had just blown by him as soon as he pulled over I would have been OK. Since I was being careful, I got nailed. Sheesh. When an emergency vehicle comes by I pull over, and give them as much room as I can. Hardly anyone else around here does that anymore.

Like somebody else said, you're just too darn reasonable! We hear all these horror stories about somebody getting pulled over by a good old boy officer down south. Frankly I'd rather get pulled over down in your neck of the woods than my home state.

Thanks for listening to my whining. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Mike

 

[Boondox]

Mike -- I hate following emergency vehicles for just that reason. A couple of times I've had them pull onto the right shoulder and make a tires burning U-turn right in front of me...and the blue lights come on only after they're headed the other way. I see this oblivious style of driving more often with the youngsters, and think it must be an adrenaline rush or something. The old timers generally feel somewhat mortal behind the wheel. There are old troopers, and there are bold troopers, but there are few old bold troopers! /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Pete

PS: No offense intended to any of our law enforcement officials; like any occupation, it seems there is a learning curve.

 

[TimSullivan]

I also live in New York State and can only share this with you.

While I am neither a lawyer nor officer, I do know that if an emergency vehicle has its lights and siren on that does not allow them to act carelessly. By your description the officer turned in front of you as he crossed your lane. It was his responsibility to make sure that before he made such a dangerous maneuver that he placed no one in harms way.

The following happened to me. A city detective in an unmarked car was responding to a call with a light and siren when it struck my car. I will not go into all the details but I too was charged with not yielding the right of way to an emergency vehicle. A city court judge found me guilty but was reversed on appeal and the city dropped the charges. The reason for the reversal was that in the appeal judge’s opinion the detective was acting recklessly in that he was traveling at a high rate of speed on the wrong side of the road. The detective did not use good judgment and lost control of his vehicle.

A siren and emergency lights are not an excuse not to use common sense. In your situation it was the officer’s responsibility to make sure that he could make his u-turn safely. Again lights and siren are not a license to be careless.

 

[Bird]

Right, Tim, the wording in Texas is:

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( § 546.005. Duty of Care



This chapter does not relieve the operator of an authorized emergency vehicle from:



(1) the duty to operate the vehicle with appropriate regard for the safety of all persons; or



(2) the consequences of reckless disregard for the safety of others.
)</font>

 

[mwechtal]

Bird,
Yep, that's the way that my lawyer explained it.

If there had been a witness, I just might have pushed it farther. I feel morally right, so I guess I just have to leave it at that.

Besides, I'm fairly sure that the police officer that pulled in front of me had a fairly seroius "discussion" with his supervisor soon after. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif After all, if the officer does this a couple more times it just might be a bit more difficult for the county to win the case.

Mike