Pedestrian fatality 42 in a 30 - Speed Kills

Pedestrian fatality 42 in a 30 - Speed Kills

Author
Discussion

carinaman

Original Poster:

21,224 posts

171 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Seems a marked police car doing 42 in a 30 hit a pedestrian who died. It wasn't a blue light run or an emergency.

Outcome was management advice and a driver improvement course:

https://policeconduct.gov.uk/recommendations/fatal...

Graveworm

8,476 posts

70 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
carinaman said:
Seems a marked police car doing 42 in a 30 hit a pedestrian who died. It wasn't a blue light run or an emergency.

Outcome was manage ment advice and a driver improvement course:

https://policeconduct.gov.uk/recommendations/fatal...
What it pointedly doesn't say is the driver was doing 42 immediately before or at the time of the collision. All it says is prior to which is not quite the same.

V8LM

5,166 posts

208 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Wasn't looking at his speedometer and thought he was driving at or around the limit at the time - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorksh...

Travelling at 42 mph prior to the incident and calculated to be 36 mph at impact - https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/fil...

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Graveworm said:
What it pointedly doesn't say is the driver was doing 42 immediately before or at the time of the collision. All it says is prior to which is not quite the same.
What it also says is...

That link said:
We referred the matter to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for them to consider offences of causing death by dangerous driving, causing death by driving without due care and attention, driving without due care and attention, and speeding. Two CPS prosecutors reviewed the case and concluded that there was no realistic prospect of conviction for any offence.
and
That link also said:
An inquest into the man’s death was held; the Coroner recorded a narrative finding.
In other words, it wasn't the driver's fault. Even with all the data logging and reconstruction, the CPS didn't think there was any evidence for even...
The legal definition of Careless Driving said:
Driving that falls below the standard expected of a competent driver
or
Driving that does not show reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or pathways.
30mph = 14 metres per second
42mph = 18 metres per second

So what did happen? The pedestrian just stepped out in front of a very visible car?

From the inquest...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorksh...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorksh...

So he just stepped out onto a ped crossing despite the lights being green for traffic...

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
carinaman said:
Seems a marked police car doing 42 in a 30 hit a pedestrian who died. It wasn't a blue light run or an emergency.

Outcome was management advice and a driver improvement course:

https://policeconduct.gov.uk/recommendations/fatal...
Look on the bright side. The death of an individual has given you something to moan about with regards the police. Not quite win:win I know, but getting there.


carinaman

Original Poster:

21,224 posts

171 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Thanks for more facts.

What's the mention about Misconduct about then? Just the driving?

Pica-Pica

13,625 posts

83 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
When I drive, I always anticipate errant pedestrians at crossings, even light controlled. People just cross anyway.

XCP

16,876 posts

227 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
carinaman said:
Thanks for more facts.

What's the mention about Misconduct about then? Just the driving?
So it seems.
Keep up the good work.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
carinaman said:
What's the mention about Misconduct about then? Just the driving?
Yes - much lower standard of proof for a formal bking from your employer than for an actual criminal prosecution.

Remember, this was an Astra panda, not a traffic car. AIUI, panda drivers don't actually need any training above a normal licence.

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
Yes - much lower standard of proof for a formal bking from your employer than for an actual criminal prosecution.

Remember, this was an Astra panda, not a traffic car. AIUI, panda drivers don't actually need any training above a normal licence.
Depends on the role. A panda driver could have a basic driving authority which gets them from A-B. But some will have response driving with blues on. They could also have initial pursuit training along with covert response training and still drive a panda.

carinaman

Original Poster:

21,224 posts

171 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
BBC News Website said:
Ms Pilkington said her family was "devastated" that there had been no prosecution despite evidence that the officer was speeding.

She was told black box recordings were not admissible evidence in criminal courts.
Black box recordings are not admissible in Courts?

Yet Dashcam and Go Pro footage is?

Police officer worn video camera footage is admissible in Courts, but black box recordings aren't?

confused

XCP

16,876 posts

227 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
It's obviously a conspiracy to prevent this officer from being prosecuted. The CPS, PSD and the judges are all in on it....probably all on the level.

Sheepshanks

32,535 posts

118 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
It was an Antara, not an Astra - so that may not have helped the outcome. Report says (as is often stated on PH) the speedo would have been reading 45.

Seems the bobby really got away with it for some reason - similar case near us (30 in a 20) driver got 12 months prison.

Countdown

39,690 posts

195 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
carinaman said:
Black box recordings are not admissible in Courts?

Yet Dashcam and Go Pro footage is?

Police officer worn video camera footage is admissible in Courts, but black box recordings aren't?

confused
Why confused ?

Black boxes don't record video. Dashcams/bodycams/ go pro do.

Flibble

6,470 posts

180 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
I'd assume there's no calibration of black boxes, so they wouldn't be reliable enough to use as evidence.

Dixy

2,915 posts

204 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
panda drivers don't actually need any training above a normal licence.
Most forces require any employee driving any force owned vehicle to undergo at least a days instruction, if for no other reason than they can be disciplined for failing to do powdery checks.

TwigtheWonderkid

43,248 posts

149 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
If you're doing 30, someone steps out ahead, you hit the brakes and you come to a halt 1mm from hitting them, then had you been doing 42 instead of 30, you would have hit them at over 29mph.

Sheepshanks

32,535 posts

118 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Flibble said:
I'd assume there's no calibration of black boxes, so they wouldn't be reliable enough to use as evidence.
There certainly is, and they did a ton of checks on it again afterwards, comparing to actual speed and the car's speedo. Hence the conclusion that the actual speed was 42 and speedo indicated speed was 45.

The car had video but it hadn't worked for a while (since the engine was replaced) yet no-one had reported it.

You have to wonder why the cop wasn't even done for speeding. Wonder if he'd have had the gall to plead not guilty?

He'd also stuck his personal sat-nav on the screen in such a position as it would have failed MOT. The report wonders if that might have obscured his view of the pedestrian.



Willy Nilly

12,511 posts

166 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Was the pedestrian blind? How do you not see a marked police car?

Sheepshanks

32,535 posts

118 months

Saturday 21st July 2018
quotequote all
Willy Nilly said:
Was the pedestrian blind? How do you not see a marked police car?
It was dark. Witness reports say he started off across the two lane road but then appeared to realise the car was approaching in lane 2 faster than he'd realised.

It reads like the police car pretty well just drove into him.