There was a precedent set recently, regarding impaired care and control of a vehicle relating to being in vehicle with keys and/or engine running but not actually driving. A driver found in those circumstances, was charged with impaired.... and was found not guilty.
No Charges Warranted in Fatal Motorcycle Crash in Alliston Case Number: 15-PVD-126
- Thread starter griff2
- Start date
- Status
I agree that the rider should not have got on the bike.
That being said, the police could have towed the bike to prevent any issues, however, I assume they can't unless they can first confirm the driver is drunk - no win situation for the cop, riders fault.
That being said, the police could have towed the bike to prevent any issues, however, I assume they can't unless they can first confirm the driver is drunk - no win situation for the cop, riders fault.
They could have. Could have also approached the guy and told him to smarten up before he got on it. Of coarse.. then she wouldn't get to bust him. I doubt very much that most of them are really interested in protecting and serving as much as they are concerned about their arrest numbers and careers.
Agreed, I guess. It's a hobby. This SIU report was posted for chum. That the wording of said report is possibly suspect speaks to precedent. What are you going to do?
My Lawyer buddy, ironically also my drinking buddy, says mounting a decent defense on a DUI is about a 10k investment, if your not guilty you don't get a refund. Best to avoid having that conversation.
I don't think you can charge someone for attempted DUI, or consiracy to DUI, so they probably can't do anything until in/on the vehicle.
Face
Well-known member
These!
Was the rider stupid and completely in the wrong to drink & ride, and to run when lit up? Absolutely!
Did the officer follow the rules, and was therefore not in the wrong. It appears so from the SIU report.
But its a shame that the SIU report only focused on clearing the officer, and did not look at potential procedure changes that could have prevented a needless death. Even if it is not within the SIU's mandate (and maybe it should be), they could have flagged this for a further inquiry.
The rider was already reported from 1 bar, and was coming out of another, so the police had reasonable cause to approach and question the guy before he got on his bike. Pulling up behind, blocking him in, getting out to try to convince him to take a cab/uber home would have probably prevented a crime and saved a life. Just lighting him up from across the parking lot created a reasonable probability that he would run, putting both himself and the public at risk.
Sure hind sight is 20/20, but isn't the purpose of any review or inquiry to see if things could have been done differently/better. It's a shame that the mandate of the police seems to be more about enforcing the law (in this case allowing the crime to be committed so they then had the evidence to enforce it) then actually preventing the crime in the first place.
I feel sorry for the family of the rider, and for the family of the next guy, or innocent victim, that could have been prevented if the police would have actually learned from this incident and improved their procedures.
Taking preemptive action, i.e. the slap on the wrist approach, would have taught the guy nothing. Face it, the guy already committed enough grievous acts riding to and from various bars in an intoxicated state, do you really think that someone that does so with such apparent casual disregard isn't going to do the exact same thing again, perhaps the next night, if the officer cut him some slack in this scenario?
I'd venture to suggest no. He do it again, probably without a second thought, perhaps empowered by the fact that he got away with it before, and next thing you know he's running into someone and killing an innocent person.
With all due respect, anything else is excuse making. He deserved to be nailed, he deserved to be charged, he deserved to loose his licence and he deserved to be uninsurable on a bike for a long time to come. Only his drunken decision to run resulted in his own death.
I'd venture to suggest no. He do it again, probably without a second thought, perhaps empowered by the fact that he got away with it before, and next thing you know he's running into someone and killing an innocent person.
With all due respect, anything else is excuse making. He deserved to be nailed, he deserved to be charged, he deserved to loose his licence and he deserved to be uninsurable on a bike for a long time to come. Only his drunken decision to run resulted in his own death.
If I had to nitpick this is what I would pick. Officer waited for rider to put himself into guilty mode (get on bike). But report says emergency lights activated before rider got on the bike. If there's a lie in the report this is it imho.
bboySushi
Well-known member
It’s so difficult.
We say everything is fine, but I’m sure this scenariorepeats but instead the driver/rider kills a pedestrian or anotherdriver/rider. Then you wouldn’t be so quick to say “it’s all good, he had tolearn a lesson the hard way”. What about the innocent person they killed?
It’s also tough for the police, I’m sure they are under alot of pressure too as it is in the end, a career. Forget about the monetarymotivations, arrests and convictions look so much better in the eyes of thepublic. Would you spend money on the police force if you looked at the statsand saw a low arrest rate or low crime rate? Of course not. But what might behappening is the police are preventing crimes..they are part of the cause ofthe low crime rate but it just doesn’t look that way to many. Certainly not topoliticians.
DUI is just so selfish and inconsiderate, I hope all of youkeep your buddies from doing it.
We say everything is fine, but I’m sure this scenariorepeats but instead the driver/rider kills a pedestrian or anotherdriver/rider. Then you wouldn’t be so quick to say “it’s all good, he had tolearn a lesson the hard way”. What about the innocent person they killed?
It’s also tough for the police, I’m sure they are under alot of pressure too as it is in the end, a career. Forget about the monetarymotivations, arrests and convictions look so much better in the eyes of thepublic. Would you spend money on the police force if you looked at the statsand saw a low arrest rate or low crime rate? Of course not. But what might behappening is the police are preventing crimes..they are part of the cause ofthe low crime rate but it just doesn’t look that way to many. Certainly not topoliticians.
DUI is just so selfish and inconsiderate, I hope all of youkeep your buddies from doing it.
I think its about time to start removing "To Serve & Protect" from police cruiser livery until it's clear who is being served. The police, government, or the liquor manufacturers? Are pretzels included? What's the tip? I'd mention the rider, but he was condemned by the constabulary and GTAMers without due process. See you on the roads, gents, or should I say SIU? Let's hope the revised notes of a civil servant don't write you off some (bad) day. #inrebrules
If the result of this was that this guy only killed himself instead of the very real chance he killed some other innocent motorist or pedestrian, there's a strong argument to be made that they're serving society as a whole in this situation.
If he'd done exactly that, as mentioned, there would be people lining up to persecute law enforcement for letting him go.
There will always be a few apparent drunk driving or "aww, just let him off" apologists mixed into these sorts of discussions however just for ***** and giggles.
-D-
Banned
Sad he died. I wonder if the bar had security, maybe someone could have kept him busy talking to him about his bike or just go out and deflate his tire then stand with him and show him bike has a flat tire, need some help. While that is happening they can call the police, let the police show up and deal with it. The goal for everyone should have been to keep him off the bike.
I agree with all your points but what happens the next time when someone does not report him for riding coming out of a bar?and he decides to get on the bike again and again until something worse happens?
I think that someone that has the balls to ride while allegedly drunk will continue to do so until something happens.
I do agree that the police mentality is to punish instead of preventing.
I think that someone that has the balls to ride while allegedly drunk will continue to do so until something happens.
I do agree that the police mentality is to punish instead of preventing.
How strong of an argument? The police were called. They took the call seriously enough to responded to the scene. They identified the bike in question. They stuck around, waiting for the guy to come out. What service and protection did they provide to the public? They let the guy ride off. How exactly are they "serving society as a WHOLE in this situation"? Please blow my mind. Thanks in advance.
Face
Well-known member
So he looses his licence, looses his job because he needs his licence to do it, and possibly gets a criminal record. Of course that will bring him back to being a good upstanding citizen. Or maybe he'll wake up with a hangover and realize he just caught the luckiest break of his life, and start to rethink a few things, including a potential respect for the police that he probably doesn't have now. Maybe you're right. Always best to assume the worst, that way you're never disappointed.
As has been mentioned, until he actually got on the seat (and in a split second started the bike and ran) they wouldn't have been able to charge him with much that would have acted as a deterrent, or better yet, got him off the roads.
The resulting situation was basically a result of a legal requirement that allowed him to get to the point he did. Had the cop prevented the whole situation before he even got on the bike he couldn't have been charged with DUI. He'd still have his bike, he'd still have his license, and he'd still have an unblemished driving/insurance record, so in the end he'd probably just continue doing his drunk riding routine until something did happen.
Its a damned if you do damned if you don't situation. I'd side with the police on this one.
I have a buddy that drinks and drives. He admits it to me, tells me how he waits it out in the bar and only leaves when he feels like hes in control. I try talking to him about how dangerous it is, how he might feel ok, but risking other peoples lives is just irresponsible. He couldn't give a ****.. He only has a G2, and talks of obtaining his G so that he can legally have a blood alcohol content if ever tested.
I'm starting to really dislike this kid. This is not the only socially irresponsible thing he does. I keep wasting my time trying to convince this prick to grow up and stop living like a child. Nope. He's currently invincible. Can't get caught.. etc.. You just can't help some people.. They are the ones in NEED of a lesson from a higher authority.
I refuse to be an apologist for anybody that chooses (and it IS a choice) to drink and drive, Nor do I give two ***** about their own personal consequences that happen as a result of their actions. So you loose your job as a result of your stupidity? Boo F'n Hoo. When you're old enough to drink, you're not only old enough to know better than to drink and drive (much less drink a ride a bloody motorcycle!), but you're also old enough to take responsibility for your actions.
It seems to be increasingly the up-and-coming generation that have a big issue with the "actions have consequences" realities of life, however.
I have a buddy that drinks and drives. He admits it to me, tells me how he waits it out in the bar and only leaves when he feels like hes in control. I try talking to him about how dangerous it is, how he might feel ok, but risking other peoples lives is just irresponsible. He couldn't give a ****.. He only has a G2, and talks of obtaining his G so that he can legally have a blood alcohol content if ever tested.
A short call to the police will straighten him out quick....but be prepared to lose the friend.
- Status
