first rider killed this year in the gta, does it on a crotch rocket, the new outlaw biker of today, maybe he didn't have insurance?
|
|
|
SIU investigation
- Thread starter yyz
- Start date
I don't think anyone is stupid enough to blame the SUV driver...
....unless we found out they ran a red.
nightflex
Well-known member
RIP rider.
As for the law, I have been pulled over and had my car impounded while on the way to pay rent for my place.
The cop was driving south bound as I was going north bound, doing about 80 in a 60 zone.
I keep driving then come to a stop at a red light and I see a cop coming behind me stopping at the red light. The light goes green and I start moving and he turned on his light and pulled me over.
So I am thinking okay probably saw me doing 70 or so... he gets off his car tells me to turn off my car and give him the keys and I asked him why? He said I was doing 101km in a 50 km zone. Off course I protested and I said I don't think I was anywhere near that... another cop shows up - bad cop, good cop. Anyways, he gave me a court summon and I had to call someone to pick me up while my car got towed away.
I get to the impound to find out how much its going to cost me, $1100 for 7 days, $150 for license reinstatement, $800 to the local lawyer, $380 for the eventual ticket.. but the story continues..
I get a lawyer to fight the ticket, the lawyer tells me he knows the cop personally and the cop is trying to move up in the department as he's expecting his first child - I honestly don't care but it seems he was looking to charge the next person he saw speeding. Anyway, I get to the court with the lawyer, the judges hears the case and my lawyer tells the judge that it was a 60km zone not a 50 making it a minor ticket. I sort of win the case and its a minor ticket. The cop tells me you got lucky kid. I walk out.
I get hit the impound fee, license fee, lawyer, ticket and a suspension notice on my abstract while the cop realized he was wrong regarding the speed limit where he pulled me over.
Now someone tell me how the hell am I supposed to make him accountable for being wrong and affecting my life financially for 3 years and a suspension for stunt driving. How am I supposed to get insurance with the suspension on my abstract and believe me I have tried.
I hope he dies a slow death.... on duty.
As for the law, I have been pulled over and had my car impounded while on the way to pay rent for my place.
The cop was driving south bound as I was going north bound, doing about 80 in a 60 zone.
I keep driving then come to a stop at a red light and I see a cop coming behind me stopping at the red light. The light goes green and I start moving and he turned on his light and pulled me over.
So I am thinking okay probably saw me doing 70 or so... he gets off his car tells me to turn off my car and give him the keys and I asked him why? He said I was doing 101km in a 50 km zone. Off course I protested and I said I don't think I was anywhere near that... another cop shows up - bad cop, good cop. Anyways, he gave me a court summon and I had to call someone to pick me up while my car got towed away.
I get to the impound to find out how much its going to cost me, $1100 for 7 days, $150 for license reinstatement, $800 to the local lawyer, $380 for the eventual ticket.. but the story continues..
I get a lawyer to fight the ticket, the lawyer tells me he knows the cop personally and the cop is trying to move up in the department as he's expecting his first child - I honestly don't care but it seems he was looking to charge the next person he saw speeding. Anyway, I get to the court with the lawyer, the judges hears the case and my lawyer tells the judge that it was a 60km zone not a 50 making it a minor ticket. I sort of win the case and its a minor ticket. The cop tells me you got lucky kid. I walk out.
I get hit the impound fee, license fee, lawyer, ticket and a suspension notice on my abstract while the cop realized he was wrong regarding the speed limit where he pulled me over.
Now someone tell me how the hell am I supposed to make him accountable for being wrong and affecting my life financially for 3 years and a suspension for stunt driving. How am I supposed to get insurance with the suspension on my abstract and believe me I have tried.
I hope he dies a slow death.... on duty.
油井緋色;1978713 said:
Sorry don't think it came out clear. I assume the SUV driver is an innocent party in this instance. I can only imagine the feeling they would go through just being involved in a fatality.
That is strong incentive to run.
and that is exactly why the law is BS.
The ONLY way they can make it even slightly right is by reimbursing people for the tow and impound, striking the suspension off the abstract and having the ticketing officer say he or she is "sorry" and paying compensation.
They're allowed to chase whoever they want. It is, however, their responsibility to terminate a chase if it becomes too dangerous to the surrounding public. Many police officers simply choose not to chase motorcycles because they know they're unlikely to be apprehended.
The SIU is investigating because they have to.
How fast were they going? What were the conditions? How much traffic was there at the time? How much time had elapsed since the pursuit was initiated? Was he even going fast enough to justify stunt driving? How do we know that's why the rider ran? Did the rider even know he was being pursued yet? Maybe he was just an idiot who ran because FTP? Or maybe he was on drugs? Or maybe... Nobody here knows. So let them investigate and then we can judge later.
Everyone in this thread jumped onto the idea that he ran because he was about to be charged with stunt driving... Yet, I'm not seeing anything in the news saying why the Police tried to initiate a traffic stop.
Last edited:
Hey just an idea. Take him and the Police region to small claims court.
It's worth a shot or they might just settle with you.
Tell them you want $15k if you settle to cover all fees and future fees due to insurance rate increase.
Assuming your story is 100% accurate, this is the crap that happens.
sue the cop, you know you could do that right?
not saying its gonna be cheap or easy but its doable.
Matthew.Tremayne
Well-known member
#1: Never bad mouth someone who has passed away, it's disrespectful.
#2: Follow the rules of the roads, then you will not get in trouble. The rules are in place for a reason, if you think they are stupid, try living in a different country and see how much better it is for you.
#3: Running from police never ends well, there is always a high risk of injury to the public, officers and the runner.
The part that bothers me the most is the fact people here (Riders) are making comments like the "Gene Pool" comment. Just disgusting how riders will bash another rider who has passed. RIP.
#2: Follow the rules of the roads, then you will not get in trouble. The rules are in place for a reason, if you think they are stupid, try living in a different country and see how much better it is for you.
#3: Running from police never ends well, there is always a high risk of injury to the public, officers and the runner.
The part that bothers me the most is the fact people here (Riders) are making comments like the "Gene Pool" comment. Just disgusting how riders will bash another rider who has passed. RIP.
Last edited:
zeniceguy
Well-known member
Number 3 your wrong. there are many people in this site that can tell you running normaly does end well. its just wore if u dont get away.
Bingo. It's naive to think that the HTA 172 hasn't affected many decisions on pulling over or, twisting the throttle for 30 seconds.
livinwithnofear
Banned
This is a really sad story, I feel like writing a letter to the police department to send them my disgust. Guys I don't know about most of you but i'm sure alot of bikers have a death wish already, a lot of police know this and will not chase, however I feel this must have been a rookie.
The sad part is how this ended and will continue to end, come on a lot of us dont have a lot of money and are living pay check to paycheck, a cop can slap us with a few tickets and our insurance policies get canceled / we lose our jobs etc... The incentive is to escape because the consequences are too severe, I would definitely stop if fines were lower and didnt affect insurance. Hopefully the SIU finds out what really went down, and I hope and pray that the rider was innocent in terms of the no pursuit law and the cop gets put in the slammer for years... Maybe this will bring a new day to the bikers, just moved to Ontario and I am already in shock...
Anyways for more details on pursuit laws in Ontario please read:
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2010/elaws_src_regs_r10266_e.htm
1. (1) For the purposes of this Regulation, a suspect apprehension pursuit occurs when a police officer attempts to direct the driver of a motor vehicle to stop, the driver refuses to obey the officer and the officer pursues in a motor vehicle for the purpose of stopping the fleeing motor vehicle or identifying the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle.
(2) A suspect apprehension pursuit is discontinued when police officers are no longer pursuing a fleeing motor vehicle for the purpose of stopping the fleeing motor vehicle or identifying the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle.
Initiating or continuing pursuit
2. (1) A police officer may pursue, or continue to pursue, a fleeing motor vehicle that fails to stop,
(a) if the police officer has reason to believe that a criminal offence has been committed or is about to be committed; or
(b) for the purposes of motor vehicle identification or the identification of an individual in the vehicle.
(2) Before initiating a suspect apprehension pursuit, a police officer shall determine that there are no alternatives available as set out in the written procedures of,
(a) the police force of the officer established under subsection 6 (1), if the officer is a member of an Ontario police force as defined in the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009;
(b) a police force whose local commander was notified of the appointment of the officer under subsection 6 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part II of that Act; or
(c) the local police force of the local commander who appointed the officer under subsection 15 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part III of that Act.
(3) A police officer shall, before initiating a suspect apprehension pursuit, determine whether in order to protect public safety the immediate need to apprehend an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle or the need to identify the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle outweighs the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit.
(4) During a suspect apprehension pursuit, a police officer shall continually reassess the determination made under subsection (3) and shall discontinue the pursuit when the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit outweighs the risk to public safety that may result if an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not immediately apprehended or if the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not identified.
(5) No police officer shall initiate a suspect apprehension pursuit for a non-criminal offence if the identity of an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is known.
(6) A police officer engaging in a suspect apprehension pursuit for a non-criminal offence shall discontinue the pursuit once the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is identified.
Notice of pursuit
3. (1) A police officer shall notify a dispatcher when the officer initiates a suspect apprehension pursuit.
(2) The dispatcher shall notify a communications supervisor or road supervisor, if a supervisor is available, that a suspect apprehension pursuit has been initiated.
Order to discontinue pursuit
4. (1) A communications or road supervisor shall order police officers to discontinue a suspect apprehension pursuit if, in his or her opinion, the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit outweighs the risk to public safety that may result if an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not immediately apprehended or if the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not identified.
(2) A police officer who receives an order under subsection (1) shall obey the order even if the officer is not a member of the police force of the communications or road supervisor who made the order.
Policies
5. Every police services board shall establish policies that are consistent with this Regulation about suspect apprehension pursuits.
Procedures for tactics
6. (1) Every police force shall establish written procedures that set out the tactics that may be used in its jurisdiction,
(a) as an alternative to suspect apprehension pursuit; and
(b) for following or stopping a fleeing motor vehicle.
(2) Every police force shall establish written procedures that are consistent with this Regulation about suspect apprehension pursuits in its jurisdiction.
Use of firearm
7. A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm for the sole purpose of attempting to stop a fleeing motor vehicle.
Pursuit in unmarked police motor vehicle
8. A police officer in an unmarked police motor vehicle shall not engage in a suspect apprehension pursuit unless a marked police motor vehicle is not readily available and the police officer believes that it is necessary to immediately apprehend an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle or to identify the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle.
Stopping a motor vehicle
9. (1) During a suspect apprehension pursuit, a police officer shall consider the tactics for stopping a motor vehicle as set out in the written procedures of,
(a) the police force of the officer established under subsection 6 (1), if the officer is a member of an Ontario police force as defined in the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009;
(b) a police force whose local commander was notified of the appointment of the officer under subsection 6 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part II of that Act; or
(c) the local police force of the local commander who appointed the officer under subsection 15 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part III of that Act.
(2) A police officer may intentionally cause a police motor vehicle to come into physical contact with a fleeing motor vehicle for the purposes of stopping it only if the officer believes on reasonable grounds that to do so is necessary to immediately protect against loss of life or serious bodily harm.
(3) In considering the action mentioned in subsection (2), a police officer shall assess the effect of the action on the safety of other members of the public and police officers.
(4) Despite subsection (2), a police officer may cause a police motor vehicle to come into physical contact with a fleeing motor vehicle for the purposes of pinning it if the fleeing motor vehicle has lost control or collided with an object and come to a stop and the driver of the motor vehicle continues to try to use it to flee.
(5) Nothing in subsection (2) precludes police officers involved in a pursuit, with assistance from other police officers in motor vehicles, from attempting to safely position the police motor vehicles in a manner to prevent the movement either forward, backward or sideways of a fleeing motor vehicle.
(6) Every police force shall ensure that its police officers receive training about the intentional physical contact between motor vehicles that is described in subsection (2).
(7) The training must address the matters described in subsections (2) and (3).
Other procedures
10. (1) Every police force shall establish written procedures on the management and control of suspect apprehension pursuits.
(2) The procedures must describe the responsibilities of police officers, dispatchers, communications supervisors and road supervisors.
(3) The procedures must describe the equipment that is available for implementing alternative tactics.
Supervision
11. (1) If more than one jurisdiction is involved in a suspect apprehension pursuit, the supervisor in the jurisdiction in which the pursuit begins has decision-making responsibility for the pursuit.
(2) The supervisor may hand over decision-making responsibility to a supervisor in another jurisdiction involved in the pursuit.
Application of code of conduct
12. A police officer does not breach the code of conduct when deciding not to initiate or choosing to discontinue a suspect apprehension pursuit because he or she has reason to believe that the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit outweighs the risk to public safety that may result if an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not immediately apprehended or if the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not identified.
Training
13. Every police force shall ensure that its police officers, dispatchers, communications supervisors and road supervisors receive training accredited by the Solicitor General about suspect apprehension pursuits.
Records
14. (1) If a police officer engages in a suspect apprehension pursuit and the officer is a member of an Ontario police force as defined in the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009, the police force of which the officer is a member shall ensure that the particulars of the pursuit are recorded on a form and in a manner approved by the Solicitor General.
(2) If a police officer engages in a suspect apprehension pursuit and the officer is appointed under the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009, the officer shall report the particulars of the pursuit to the appointing official or local commander who appointed the officer under that Act and that person shall ensure that the particulars are recorded on a form and in a manner approved by the Solicitor General.
Revocation
15. Ontario Regulation 546/99 is revoked.
Commencement
16. This Regulation comes into force on the later of the day the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009 comes into force and the day this Regulation is filed.
The sad part is how this ended and will continue to end, come on a lot of us dont have a lot of money and are living pay check to paycheck, a cop can slap us with a few tickets and our insurance policies get canceled / we lose our jobs etc... The incentive is to escape because the consequences are too severe, I would definitely stop if fines were lower and didnt affect insurance. Hopefully the SIU finds out what really went down, and I hope and pray that the rider was innocent in terms of the no pursuit law and the cop gets put in the slammer for years... Maybe this will bring a new day to the bikers, just moved to Ontario and I am already in shock...
Anyways for more details on pursuit laws in Ontario please read:
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2010/elaws_src_regs_r10266_e.htm
ONTARIO REGULATION 266/10made under thePOLICE SERVICES ACTMade: April 28, 2010
Filed: June 28, 2010
Published on e-Laws: June 30, 2010
Printed in The Ontario Gazette: July 17, 2010
SUSPECT APPREHENSION PURSUITS
InterpretationFiled: June 28, 2010
Published on e-Laws: June 30, 2010
Printed in The Ontario Gazette: July 17, 2010
SUSPECT APPREHENSION PURSUITS
1. (1) For the purposes of this Regulation, a suspect apprehension pursuit occurs when a police officer attempts to direct the driver of a motor vehicle to stop, the driver refuses to obey the officer and the officer pursues in a motor vehicle for the purpose of stopping the fleeing motor vehicle or identifying the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle.
(2) A suspect apprehension pursuit is discontinued when police officers are no longer pursuing a fleeing motor vehicle for the purpose of stopping the fleeing motor vehicle or identifying the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle.
Initiating or continuing pursuit
2. (1) A police officer may pursue, or continue to pursue, a fleeing motor vehicle that fails to stop,
(a) if the police officer has reason to believe that a criminal offence has been committed or is about to be committed; or
(b) for the purposes of motor vehicle identification or the identification of an individual in the vehicle.
(2) Before initiating a suspect apprehension pursuit, a police officer shall determine that there are no alternatives available as set out in the written procedures of,
(a) the police force of the officer established under subsection 6 (1), if the officer is a member of an Ontario police force as defined in the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009;
(b) a police force whose local commander was notified of the appointment of the officer under subsection 6 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part II of that Act; or
(c) the local police force of the local commander who appointed the officer under subsection 15 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part III of that Act.
(3) A police officer shall, before initiating a suspect apprehension pursuit, determine whether in order to protect public safety the immediate need to apprehend an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle or the need to identify the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle outweighs the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit.
(4) During a suspect apprehension pursuit, a police officer shall continually reassess the determination made under subsection (3) and shall discontinue the pursuit when the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit outweighs the risk to public safety that may result if an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not immediately apprehended or if the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not identified.
(5) No police officer shall initiate a suspect apprehension pursuit for a non-criminal offence if the identity of an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is known.
(6) A police officer engaging in a suspect apprehension pursuit for a non-criminal offence shall discontinue the pursuit once the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is identified.
Notice of pursuit
3. (1) A police officer shall notify a dispatcher when the officer initiates a suspect apprehension pursuit.
(2) The dispatcher shall notify a communications supervisor or road supervisor, if a supervisor is available, that a suspect apprehension pursuit has been initiated.
Order to discontinue pursuit
4. (1) A communications or road supervisor shall order police officers to discontinue a suspect apprehension pursuit if, in his or her opinion, the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit outweighs the risk to public safety that may result if an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not immediately apprehended or if the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not identified.
(2) A police officer who receives an order under subsection (1) shall obey the order even if the officer is not a member of the police force of the communications or road supervisor who made the order.
Policies
5. Every police services board shall establish policies that are consistent with this Regulation about suspect apprehension pursuits.
Procedures for tactics
6. (1) Every police force shall establish written procedures that set out the tactics that may be used in its jurisdiction,
(a) as an alternative to suspect apprehension pursuit; and
(b) for following or stopping a fleeing motor vehicle.
(2) Every police force shall establish written procedures that are consistent with this Regulation about suspect apprehension pursuits in its jurisdiction.
Use of firearm
7. A police officer shall not discharge his or her firearm for the sole purpose of attempting to stop a fleeing motor vehicle.
Pursuit in unmarked police motor vehicle
8. A police officer in an unmarked police motor vehicle shall not engage in a suspect apprehension pursuit unless a marked police motor vehicle is not readily available and the police officer believes that it is necessary to immediately apprehend an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle or to identify the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle.
Stopping a motor vehicle
9. (1) During a suspect apprehension pursuit, a police officer shall consider the tactics for stopping a motor vehicle as set out in the written procedures of,
(a) the police force of the officer established under subsection 6 (1), if the officer is a member of an Ontario police force as defined in the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009;
(b) a police force whose local commander was notified of the appointment of the officer under subsection 6 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part II of that Act; or
(c) the local police force of the local commander who appointed the officer under subsection 15 (1) of theInterprovincial Policing Act, 2009, if the officer was appointed under Part III of that Act.
(2) A police officer may intentionally cause a police motor vehicle to come into physical contact with a fleeing motor vehicle for the purposes of stopping it only if the officer believes on reasonable grounds that to do so is necessary to immediately protect against loss of life or serious bodily harm.
(3) In considering the action mentioned in subsection (2), a police officer shall assess the effect of the action on the safety of other members of the public and police officers.
(4) Despite subsection (2), a police officer may cause a police motor vehicle to come into physical contact with a fleeing motor vehicle for the purposes of pinning it if the fleeing motor vehicle has lost control or collided with an object and come to a stop and the driver of the motor vehicle continues to try to use it to flee.
(5) Nothing in subsection (2) precludes police officers involved in a pursuit, with assistance from other police officers in motor vehicles, from attempting to safely position the police motor vehicles in a manner to prevent the movement either forward, backward or sideways of a fleeing motor vehicle.
(6) Every police force shall ensure that its police officers receive training about the intentional physical contact between motor vehicles that is described in subsection (2).
(7) The training must address the matters described in subsections (2) and (3).
Other procedures
10. (1) Every police force shall establish written procedures on the management and control of suspect apprehension pursuits.
(2) The procedures must describe the responsibilities of police officers, dispatchers, communications supervisors and road supervisors.
(3) The procedures must describe the equipment that is available for implementing alternative tactics.
Supervision
11. (1) If more than one jurisdiction is involved in a suspect apprehension pursuit, the supervisor in the jurisdiction in which the pursuit begins has decision-making responsibility for the pursuit.
(2) The supervisor may hand over decision-making responsibility to a supervisor in another jurisdiction involved in the pursuit.
Application of code of conduct
12. A police officer does not breach the code of conduct when deciding not to initiate or choosing to discontinue a suspect apprehension pursuit because he or she has reason to believe that the risk to public safety that may result from the pursuit outweighs the risk to public safety that may result if an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not immediately apprehended or if the fleeing motor vehicle or an individual in the fleeing motor vehicle is not identified.
Training
13. Every police force shall ensure that its police officers, dispatchers, communications supervisors and road supervisors receive training accredited by the Solicitor General about suspect apprehension pursuits.
Records
14. (1) If a police officer engages in a suspect apprehension pursuit and the officer is a member of an Ontario police force as defined in the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009, the police force of which the officer is a member shall ensure that the particulars of the pursuit are recorded on a form and in a manner approved by the Solicitor General.
(2) If a police officer engages in a suspect apprehension pursuit and the officer is appointed under the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009, the officer shall report the particulars of the pursuit to the appointing official or local commander who appointed the officer under that Act and that person shall ensure that the particulars are recorded on a form and in a manner approved by the Solicitor General.
Revocation
15. Ontario Regulation 546/99 is revoked.
Commencement
16. This Regulation comes into force on the later of the day the Interprovincial Policing Act, 2009 comes into force and the day this Regulation is filed.
First - RIP to the rider - no ones deserves to die just for running even if they shouldn't
Second - Apologies and sympathy to the involved SUV driver - it is a horrible thing to be part of and live with even if you did not cause it
Third - The above Reg is merely an amended version of the old reg (to cover interprovicial policing) and the old reg is subject to and continues to be subject to a Ministry order that police shall not pursue motorcycles. This has been taught at the Police College and Services for well over 15 years. They can try to pull you over but if its clear your runing they can't pursue. The reason is it puts you at too high a risk to crash and die or kill someone else - just like what happened here!
Fourth - That does not mean the police can not try to stop you. If they pull out and light you up and you run they will not chase once it is clear you are running i.e accelerating like a bandit, high speed swerving in and out of traffic etc. This may take a few secs since so many people don't seem to notice the police trying to stop them - that is what likely happened here. The rider ran - hit the SUV a short distance away and the police were not chasing - had merely lighted him up. Because the police were involved the SIU has to be contacted. Heck they had to be contacted when a bike ran into a stopped cruiser blocking traffic with its lights on - police did nothing but be a target for the rider who somehow didn't see the car with all the lights on
Fifth - Don't run - just like its not if you will go down its when you will go down - if you run eventually you will get hurt or killed or hurt or kill someone else all of which is more serious then the stunt charge or whatever you may otherwise be facing
RIP Rider
Second - Apologies and sympathy to the involved SUV driver - it is a horrible thing to be part of and live with even if you did not cause it
Third - The above Reg is merely an amended version of the old reg (to cover interprovicial policing) and the old reg is subject to and continues to be subject to a Ministry order that police shall not pursue motorcycles. This has been taught at the Police College and Services for well over 15 years. They can try to pull you over but if its clear your runing they can't pursue. The reason is it puts you at too high a risk to crash and die or kill someone else - just like what happened here!
Fourth - That does not mean the police can not try to stop you. If they pull out and light you up and you run they will not chase once it is clear you are running i.e accelerating like a bandit, high speed swerving in and out of traffic etc. This may take a few secs since so many people don't seem to notice the police trying to stop them - that is what likely happened here. The rider ran - hit the SUV a short distance away and the police were not chasing - had merely lighted him up. Because the police were involved the SIU has to be contacted. Heck they had to be contacted when a bike ran into a stopped cruiser blocking traffic with its lights on - police did nothing but be a target for the rider who somehow didn't see the car with all the lights on
Fifth - Don't run - just like its not if you will go down its when you will go down - if you run eventually you will get hurt or killed or hurt or kill someone else all of which is more serious then the stunt charge or whatever you may otherwise be facing
RIP Rider
So are the effects of death.
I'm ALL for contesting the outrageous laws and unnecessarily low speed limits, but you have to be thick to blame the low speed limits for this rider hitting an SUV.
|
|
|
|
|