Thief kills people, police blamed.

[Elfer]

Grieving families demand answers

'I don't understand why three lives have to be lost,' says mom about teen victims of apparent police chase

Jun 04, 2007 07:02 AM
Chris Sorensen
Tamara Cherry
Staff Reporters

A third teen has died after an accident in which a stolen car crashed into a taxi while apparently fleeing police early Saturday.

Aleisha Ashley, 17, had been on life support since the accident, which also claimed the life of her best friend, 16-year-old Monique McKnight.

Aleisha was pronounced dead in hospital last night after doctors told her mother that her injuries had left her brain dead, and that there was nothing they could do to save her.

"She is no longer with us," Jannett Scott-Jones told the Toronto Star in a brief telephone interview early this morning.

The driver of the stolen car,15-year-old Chevon Josephs, was also killed in the crash, which is now being probed by the province’s Special Investigations Unit.

----------

So get this: I pick up the Toronto Star today (I gets it for free), and on the front page there's a story about a fifteen year old kid who steals a car, and while allegedly fleeing from police, crashes it into a taxi, killing himself and the two passengers in the cab.

Now, despite the fact that it hasn't even been shown that the police were chasing him, or whether or not that's why he was speeding, everyone is blaming the cops.

I don't get the jump in logic here. A car thief steals a car, starts speeding through traffic, crashed and kills two innocent people. Why are the police to blame and not him?

"Why is it that police have to chase in the middle of traffic, causing this boy to kill himself and kill my child? This boy did something wrong, but he didn't deserve to die because of it and my daughter didn't deserve to die because of it. Three people dead!"

Presumably what they're suggesting is that police let everyone go in case the person tries to avoid getting caught. Here's the thing though: The police's attention was drawn to the car because it was speeding. The kid was already speeding before the cops started chasing him (if they actually did). I assume what this means is that we're supposed to get rid of cops so criminals don't panic.

I don't know guys, is it just me, or does it seem like the blame here is slightly misplaced, or at the very least incomplete?

[Crue]

Perhaps they should attempt to charge the corpse with 2 counts of vehicular manslaughter? Because according to that article, the dead cannot be charged with crimes. I just think it would be funny if your new cellmate was a corpse.

[JudgeDredd]

*Shrugs*

Maybe it was an undercover-taxi (?)

Like if they'd hit a lampost or a tree it would be the local-councils fault.

[Elfer]

At 6/4/07 12:55 PM, Crue wrote: Perhaps they should attempt to charge the corpse with 2 counts of vehicular manslaughter? Because according to that article, the dead cannot be charged with crimes. I just think it would be funny if your new cellmate was a corpse.

That would be a good sitcom or a reality show. Weekend at Bernie's 3? I think so.

[Karzand]

I blame video games that teach children how to steal cars and then drive them at high speeds. I also blame the manufacturer of the car for producing a car that could travel at those high speeds. I also blame Henry Ford for creating the first mass-produced car.

[IllustriousPotentate]

It's obvious that the ultimate blame lies with Ug, who invented the first wheel. If that neanderthal hadn't invented such a hazardous form of movement, these three people might still be alive today!

[Elfer]

I blame God.

What have you done to us? When will it stop?

[Demosthenez]

Im confused, let the criminals go just because their crimes arent that bad, even though they are speeding away from the law? Let the criminal speed away even though the police have no knowledge of who the criminal is and isnt? What the criminal has done and hasnt done? What the criminal has in the car and what they dont?

What an idiotic article. Someone needs to remind whoever that editorial writer is that the police dont have the luxury of judging from the sidelines and judging what a criminal was capable of after the fact. I cant blame the mom for being lost and pissed, she just lost her kid and is looking for a scape goat to explain a freak accident, but SHAME on the editorial writer for penning this article and giving her claims legitimacy.

[morefngdbs]

At 6/4/07 12:30 PM, Elfer wrote: I don't know guys, is it just me, or does it seem like the blame here is slightly misplaced, or at the very least incomplete?

;
It is the usual, My child stole a car!!!! "But he really is a good boy"
IF the car thief wasn't such an irresponsible asshole, he & 2 innocent people wouldn't be dead.
It is bull shit Elfer.
The driver of the stolen car is totally at fault.
His mother/ father should be checked out by social services if they have other kids to see how they are.
If a car thief knows he/she won't be chased by the cops, cars will be stolen at a rate that won't be able to be tracked.
I don't give a shit about the dead thief, the 2 innocents are the real sad part of this story.

[SyntheticTacos]

They're probably just looking for somebody to blame; since the criminal is dead they can only find the police to blame. It's a natural (but misplaced) reaction. =\

[HighlyIllogical]

The prick stole a car and killed two innocent kids.

The cops might have made a few errors, sure, but they're not ultimately to blame. At the worst, if they could have done something to prevent the deaths, there should be some sort of slap on the wrist, but I doubt they did anything.

[UWDarDar17]

This reminds me of a case that occured last summer, somewhere around this same time.

An ex-con around Gurnee, IL, was able to rent a U-Haul Truck (which he should not be able to do, but he was able to anyway), and go around using other people's credit cards buying shit. When he went to the Home Depot in Gurnee, he was questioned by the cashier. This guy fled (with the stuff) and began to be chased by Gurnee police. It soon turned into a high-speed pursuit, lasting roughly 21 miles, gaining cops and losing them along the way as he passed in and out of various jurisdictions.

In the end, this ex-con collided with a car of four high-school seniors coming out of the parking lot of a Walgreens. It immediately killed the front-seat passenger, put the driver in a coma, and gravely injured the two in the back seats.

In the end, the ex-con was caught and convicted of 1st-Degree murder. And the cops? They were sued by the families. And the families won.

Now, some of you may be crying "bullshit", but look at it from this perspective.

The chase lasted over 20 miles, and much of it was on the tollway, and so there were state police involved with the chase as well. In that entire stretch, it never occured to the police to radio ahead and set up a roadblock, or a simple spike strip. Little goes on in these towns, and the police get bored.

I find it totally conceivable that the cops were more obsessed with playing cowboy then the safety of the people. The chase never, EVER, should have lasted as long as it did, and it especially should not have gone for so long that the con was able to get off the tollway and get into local streets. The accident was a tragedy, but it was a tragedy that could have been avoided if the police had planned properly.

The families had every right to sue and every right to win. The police caught the criminal, but failed in their primary duty: "to serve and protect".

Now, as for this case, my question is this: how long was the chase? Was is two miles? Ten? Twenty? If there was enough time to plan for this hooligan coming through a street and stopping him, then the police should have done something. They should be reprimanded, and possibly sued, in this case.

If, however, the crash was only after a couple miles, then there's no way the police can plan for something like that, and they should not be sued or reprimanded. But they should get a little slap on the wrist of some sort.

[IllustriousPotentate]

In all seriousness, I can see where the family is coming from. And I actually agree with them. While the police themselves aren't to blame, they're just following standard protocol, the idea of chasing after car thieves, drug runners, etc. isn't worth it, especially as long as the subject isn't armed and dangerous.

The safety of the motoring public should come before arresting car theives and people transporting drugs. The lives of innocent motorists are far more important than any number of cars or stopping drug smugglers. Only when other lives are in danger should the innocent public be put in danger.

[Memorize]

At 6/4/07 05:52 PM, UWDarDar17 wrote:

The families had every right to sue and every right to win. The police caught the criminal, but failed in their primary duty: "to serve and protect".

That's plain stupidity. Fuck those families.

Anyway... I believe they (the families) should be fined and jailed. Possibley for life due to good ol' plain dumbness.

[IllustriousPotentate]

At 6/4/07 08:14 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 6/4/07 05:52 PM, UWDarDar17 wrote:

The families had every right to sue and every right to win. The police caught the criminal, but failed in their primary duty: "to serve and protect".

That's plain stupidity. Fuck those families.

Anyway... I believe they (the families) should be fined and jailed. Possibley for life due to good ol' plain dumbness.

Yes. Fine and jail them for complaining their daughters were killed because of a car.

[Dash-Underscore-Dash]

How dare those corrupt pigs give chase, they should have seen that the theif did not want to be caught and respect his right to evade arrest.

[Memorize]

At 6/4/07 08:20 PM, IllustriousPotentate wrote:

\

Yes. Fine and jail them for complaining their daughters were killed because of a car.

No. Fine and jail them for complaining to the police who did not kill their daughters driving in a car.

There's a difference.

[JakeHero]

Is Toronto a left-midned province?

[SmilezRoyale]

It's most probably that if the speeding car got away, and crashed into the girls

OR

it just got away and the car was stolen, but no one got hurt.

the police would be blamed for failure to perform they're duty.

That's the problem with this world, there's no way for a judge to say, OK folks, i'm going write this note to tell me what happened first, then we'll go back in time and tell the cops from chasing the speeding car.

people are incapable of looking at all of the scenario's before making compitent judgements, if somone has a gun and threatens to kill somone, and the police are armed and are ready to fire, and you have to give them the orders, your trained to understand 2 things.

1) If you arn't able to disarm the gunman, somone is going to have to die, it's a given

2) it's your choice to descide who's of top priority, how many lives you can save in one case, that's your job.

The people who argue with this are too easilly driven by they're own emotions, and that is why they phail.

[UWDarDar17]

At 6/4/07 08:14 PM, Memorize wrote: That's plain stupidity. Fuck those families.

Anyway... I believe they (the families) should be fined and jailed. Possibley for life due to good ol' plain dumbness.

"Plain stupidity"? You really are a goddamn fucking moron, Mem. The police had multiple chances to stop that ex-con in his speeding U-Haul, and they did not take them. There were multiple reports that the police did not have their lights or sirens on. They took no action to keep the chase away from busy intersections filled with innocent lives. Because of that reckless behavior, a kid is dead. Another was in a coma for weeks.

Who are you to decide who can and cannot be sued? Are we simply to accept the mistakes made by police and say, "oh well, they were just doing their job. That car with teens shouldn't have been there in the first place"? What if it was your kid, Mem (not that I'd ever hope you'd procreate- one of you is enough in this world and we don't need to make it worse)? Your son is taken away at 16. He didn't get to go to college, get laid, get married. Would you be that parent that says, "oh well. That's life! The police did the best they could"? I hope not.

The police are not above blame. No one on this planet is ever above blame. All are responsible for their actions. The police failed. Civilians were hurt and killed. They should pay.

[Memorize]

At 6/4/07 10:02 PM, UWDarDar17 wrote:

"Plain stupidity"? You really are a goddamn fucking moron, Mem. The police had multiple chances to stop that ex-con in his speeding U-Haul, and they did not take them.

I love how responsibility shifts from the one who kills to those who prevent.

There were multiple reports that the police did not have their lights or sirens on. They took no action to keep the chase away from busy intersections filled with innocent lives. Because of that reckless behavior, a kid is dead. Another was in a coma for weeks.

And just think: This never would've happend if... the theif hadn't stole the car or the idiot hadn't kept speeding and instead, would've just pulled over to side.

Who are you to decide who can and cannot be sued?

Anyone can be sued. But these families are idiots.

Are we simply to accept the mistakes made by police and say, "oh well, they were just doing their job.

What they did wasn't even anywhere near as bad as raiding the wrong house and shooting someone. And even then, the most they get is paid leave. So why is it that these cops (who are chasing the right person) are being sued for that person's mistakes?

Stupidity maybe?

That car with teens shouldn't have been there in the first place"? What if it was your kid, Mem (not that I'd ever hope you'd procreate- one of you is enough in this world and we don't need to make it worse)?

Yeah, i'm the one making it worse. I'm not like you where i'll sue someone because I hurt... myself.

Your son is taken away at 16. He didn't get to go to college, get laid, get married. Would you be that parent that says, "oh well. That's life! The police did the best they could"? I hope not.

Police? Yes.

But I wouldn't say "that's life". And i'm not one of those idiot parents who likes to sugar coat everything and say "it's alright".

It was the kid's fault. Plain and simple.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be sad, because I would. But I would not blame the police like you fuck ups.

The police are not above blame.

And yet, the car-jacker/idiot teen is apparently.

No one on this planet is ever above blame.

Wow, if someone shot and killed a robber who broke into their house, you'd throw him/her in prison for life.

All are responsible for their actions.

The police failed.

You expect 100%?

What if a hostage crisis goes horribley wrong?

Wow, you a fucking idiot.

Civilians were hurt and killed. They should pay.

I suppose we should sue the car dealers because a car was in an accident and resulted in someone getting killed.

[UWDarDar17]

At 6/4/07 10:18 PM, Memorize wrote: I love how responsibility shifts from the one who kills to those who prevent.

The fact of the matter is they did NOT prevent when it was in their power at multiple instances to stop the driver through a number of means.

And just think: This never would've happend if... the theif hadn't stole the car or the idiot hadn't kept speeding and instead, would've just pulled over to side.

I have stated this earlier. The man did not steal the U-Haul. He used a fake ID to rent it. And the con has multiple arrests on violent charges. At the time, he also owed drug money to dealers. He stole a fridge, it was in the back of the truck. He had NO intention of stopping. The police had to stop him. And they didn't.

Anyone can be sued. But these families are idiots.

Why are they idiots, Mem? So far, you seem to keep calling them idiots, but you provide no decent reason other than the people they sue happen to be police.

I could call you an idiot as well. But I also try to back up my statements with reasoning. Idiot.

What they did wasn't even anywhere near as bad as raiding the wrong house and shooting someone. And even then, the most they get is paid leave. So why is it that these cops (who are chasing the right person) are being sued for that person's mistakes?

Then maybe police who raid the wrong house and shoot somebody should be charged, or sued. Unfortunately, the police system is notorious for protecting its own, even when they have done wrong. The cops in question are not being sued for that person's "mistake". They are being sued because their mistakes and errors in judgement got people needlessly killed and injured.

Yeah, i'm the one making it worse. I'm not like you where i'll sue someone because I hurt... myself.

I would not sue someone because I hurt myself. Even I am wiser than that. But I fail to see where these kids "hurt themselves". They were victims.

Police? Yes.

Really, you wouldn't question their actions one bit, just to make sure they did everything they could? Wow. I can't believe it- someone who doesn't question! Con artists must love you.

But I wouldn't say "that's life". And i'm not one of those idiot parents who likes to sugar coat everything and say "it's alright".

Good. That gives me a little hope in whatever shred of humanity you might have.

It was the kid's fault. Plain and simple.

Let me see if I understand you correctly. Let me see if this makes sense. The kid was in a car with his friends. They were pulling out of a parking lot after buying some soda and chips to bring back home. And it becomes THEIR fault that this lowlife scum chose not to avoid this car and drive right through it? In his trial, he expressed absolutely no remorse that the kid was dead.

You know what? I'm sorry, I don't see where your statement makes sense. The teen shouldn't have been out with his friends? What the hell is he doing on the road? What the fuck are you trying to say?

And yet, the car-jacker/idiot teen is apparently.

Well, since the con was convicted of 1st-degree murder and sentenced, probably to life in prison, I'd say that he got his due punishment, wouldn't you? The only reason that he's not on death row is because there's currently a moratorium on death sentences in the state. But again, where is the kid to blame?

Wow, if someone shot and killed a robber who broke into their house, you'd throw him/her in prison for life.

Oh wow. Brilliant tactic, Mem. Create a hypothetical situation that has nothing remotely to do with this event, and then presume to know what my actions would be. Ooh, wow, you're one smart guy.

The police failed.

You expect 100%?

I never said I expected 100%. But when people are killed when they don't need to be, I'd say that misses the mark just a little, wouldn't you say?

What if a hostage crisis goes horribley wrong?

Then you investigate what happened. If the error lies with the officer, I expect him to be disciplined. Why should I put up with incompetant cops? If the fault lies with the hostage taker, then punish him.

Wow, you a fucking idiot.

At least I'm a decent human being, which is more than many can say about you I gather.

I suppose we should sue the car dealers because a car was in an accident and resulted in someone getting killed.

Again, here we are dealing in hypotheticals. I say it depends on the car. If the brakes were faulty and the car was still sold to the driver, then yeah, maybe the dealer should be sued.

[Memorize]

At 6/4/07 10:40 PM, UWDarDar17 wrote:

The fact of the matter is they did NOT prevent when it was in their power at multiple instances to stop the driver through a number of means.

Everyone should be arrested for someone's suicide then.

I have stated this earlier. The man did not steal the U-Haul. He used a fake ID to rent it.

I was talking in general.

And the con has multiple arrests on violent charges. At the time, he also owed drug money to dealers. He stole a fridge, it was in the back of the truck. He had NO intention of stopping. The police had to stop him. And they didn't.

You know, doing something like the pit maneuver has to timed as well.

Why are they idiots, Mem?

They're blaming the wrong people.

So far, you seem to keep calling them idiots, but you provide no decent reason other than the people they sue happen to be police.

I did provide a decent reason: T'was not the cops who killed these people.

You cannot have 100% accurage all of the time.

They missed an opening, whoop dee fucking doo.

I could call you an idiot as well. But I also try to back up my statements with reasoning.

My reasoning = responsibility. Your's = stupidity to its fullest

Then maybe police who raid the wrong house and shoot somebody should be charged, or sued.

I wish. Or at least, the person who filled out the address incorrectly.

Unfortunately, the police system is notorious for protecting its own,

...because they're risking their lives...?

even when they have done wrong. The cops in question are not being sued for that person's "mistake". They are being sued because their mistakes and errors in judgement got people needlessly killed and injured.

Tell me, how is it that by doing nothing, they caused this to happen?

The difference between this and the raid is that the cops broke into the wrong house. In this scenario, the cops did not hit the person or shoot at him and he STILL wrecked. There are also times when the cops have to back away to give the guy some room if they are incapable of getting him to stop so that way, the person fleeing will have less reason to speed as much and cause a wreck.

I would not sue someone because I hurt myself. Even I am wiser than that. But I fail to see where these kids "hurt themselves". They were victims.

And who is the criminal?

Really, you wouldn't question their actions one bit, just to make sure they did everything they could? Wow. I can't believe it- someone who doesn't question! Con artists must love you.

Because I realize the world isn't perfect and everyone can make even a little mistake. But in this case, they did not cause this idiot to wreck and kill people. he did it on his own.

Which is why people like you make this world shitty, you always look for someone else to blame. If that moron didn't kill himself when he wrecked, the parents wouldn't be bitching to police. They're only doing so because the person they want to blame is dead.

Good. That gives me a little hope in whatever shred of humanity you might have.

I'm not getting where your logic is at right now.

You agree with that statement, yet somehow find the cops to blame for the criminal's conduct?

What the hell?

And it becomes THEIR fault that this lowlife scum chose not to avoid this car and drive right through it? In his trial, he expressed absolutely no remorse that the kid was dead.

I was talking about the "low life scum" you fucking idiot.

You know what? I'm sorry, I don't see where your statement makes sense.

It would've made sense if you were capable of reading.

Oh wow. Brilliant tactic, Mem. Create a hypothetical situation that has nothing remotely to do with this event, and then presume to know what my actions would be. Ooh, wow, you're one smart guy.

It would only be logical for you to throw the guy in prison for defending his property.

I mean after all, the man could've thought it was his house and tried to get in because the door was locked. Who knows?

Then you investigate what happened. If the error lies with the officer, I expect him to be disciplined. Why should I put up with incompetant cops? If the fault lies with the hostage taker, then punish him.

And what happens if the person taking the hostage decides to shoot someone out of the blue? With no warning? Starts taking out all of the hostages.

What are you going to say? The cops messed up by not going in sooner despite risking deaths?

At least I'm a decent human being, which is more than many can say about you I gather.

Decent maybe. If by decent, you mean like those idiotic families.

Again, here we are dealing in hypotheticals. I say it depends on the car. If the brakes were faulty and the car was still sold to the driver, then yeah, maybe the dealer should be sued.

No, a perfectly normal car.

Just like the dealer, the cops did not cause the guy to wreck. He caused himself to wreck and the cops tried to get him to stop, but HE didn't take the warning. HE didn't stop. HE caused the wreck WITHOUT the cops interference.

[notld224]

At 6/4/07 12:55 PM, Crue wrote: Perhaps they should attempt to charge the corpse with 2 counts of vehicular manslaughter? Because according to that article, the dead cannot be charged with crimes. I just think it would be funny if your new cellmate was a corpse.

You can degrade the corpse (Think stringing it up on a flagpole and having the birds peck at it.)
But otherwise... WHY the HELL are these blaming the police?.

So the criminal died. My god be stranded!. Great!, that saves you 100% off of a long and arduous trials with weeping mothers and pleas for leniency that'll last years and spend lots of both consumer AND government money.

[Korriken]

I personally believe that every vehicle should be fitted with a remote controlled device that the cops can use to disable a fleeing vehicle. with all the computer technology under the hood, a remote killswitch shouldn't be TOO hard to do. if an onstar system can be installed to unlock doors from an office, then there should be a way to disable a car. the cop presses a button that releases a signal, the signal stops every vehicle within 200 or so feet, a light pops up on the dashboard letting the driver know his car has been disabled by a cop.

the punishment for disabling it? 10 years minimum.

[UWDarDar17]

At 6/4/07 10:57 PM, Memorize wrote: Which is why people like you make this world shitty, you always look for someone else to blame. If that moron didn't kill himself when he wrecked, the parents wouldn't be bitching to police. They're only doing so because the person they want to blame is dead.

No, the driver is alive. He was in a coma for a few weeks. Since he hasn't been sued, I can only suspect that the parents don't blame him.

Hm, I'm not sure if you read my previous posts fully. Let's review the roles. We have the criminal. He is an ex-con driving a U-Haul gained using a fake ID. He has been convicted of 1st degree murder.

In the car that was struck by the ex-con in the U-Haul, we have the front seat passenger, who was killed on impact. We have the driver, who was in a coma for a number of weeks in critical condition. He is now alive, but suffered some brain damage.

They person they "want to blame" is very much alive. He's in prison right now serving a sentence. They are also blaming the police for their behavior.

You agree with that statement, yet somehow find the cops to blame for the criminal's conduct?

I never said that I blame the cops for the criminal's conduct. I blame the criminal for his conduct. I blame the cops for their conduct. I think both conducts were bad.

It would've made sense if you were capable of reading.

And it would have made more sense if you were capable of writing coherently.

It would only be logical for you to throw the guy in prison for defending his property.

I mean after all, the man could've thought it was his house and tried to get in because the door was locked. Who knows?

Ah, now you're changing the circumstances of the event. Before, you simply said that a homeowner shot a man and killed a man who was breaking into his home. Now, you're adding another layer of circumstances by implying that the supposed break-in was actually a mistake on another person's part. As you increase the complexity of the situation, the judgement of the event becomes more complex. Not everything is so simple, my young friend.

And what happens if the person taking the hostage decides to shoot someone out of the blue? With no warning? Starts taking out all of the hostages.

Like I said. If the fault lies with the hostage taker, then punish him.

What are you going to say? The cops messed up by not going in sooner despite risking deaths?

Now why would I say that? You just said the hostage taker began killing out of the blue. Out of the blue means without any prior warning, and no one could see it coming. This is different than the chase and crash. The road the crash happened on happens to be fairly busy almost all the time. Any cop who knows the area should automatically assume that civilians are going to be there and are going to be at risk, and that the cops should have taken action as soon as possible to stop the U-Haul before anyone was hurt. But they didn't.

Just like the dealer, the cops did not cause the guy to wreck. He caused himself to wreck and the cops tried to get him to stop, but HE didn't take the warning. HE didn't stop. HE caused the wreck WITHOUT the cops interference.

And the cops DIDN'T stop the U-Haul at the multiple chances they had. They DIDN'T try. No roadblocks, no spike strips, no nothing. Just chasing after him, for twenty miles. It's ridiculous that none of the police from here to Gurnee at any one point in time set up a roadblock or anything that would have stopped the U-Haul. It's a lot of straight road with not a lot of exits. But the cops let it escalate to the point where the U-Haul got into towns and local traffic.

And you're right. HE didn't take the warning and didn't stop. And now he's in jail, likely for the rest of his life.

[UWDarDar17]

At 6/4/07 11:18 PM, Tal-con wrote: Where are you hearing this?

I'll just assume you're pulling facts out of your ass. A kid steals a car, speeds, dies, and the police is to blame. I don't get that in the least bit.

New flash, the police do everything in their power to stop chases as fast as possible.

I'm referring to a different occurrence, Tal-con. I already shared my thought on the event posted by the topic starter.

[Memorize]

At 6/4/07 11:24 PM, UWDarDar17 wrote:

No, the driver is alive. He was in a coma for a few weeks. Since he hasn't been sued, I can only suspect that the parents don't blame him.

I was talking about the topic story.

Hm, I'm not sure if you read my previous posts fully. Let's review the roles. We have the criminal. He is an ex-con driving a U-Haul gained using a fake ID. He has been convicted of 1st degree murder.

Topic story.

In the car that was struck by the ex-con in the U-Haul, we have the front seat passenger, who was killed on impact. We have the driver, who was in a coma for a number of weeks in critical condition. He is now alive, but suffered some brain damage.

Topic story.

They person they "want to blame" is very much alive. He's in prison right now serving a sentence. They are also blaming the police for their behavior.

Still. Stupid.

I never said that I blame the cops for the criminal's conduct. I blame the criminal for his conduct. I blame the cops for their conduct. I think both conducts were bad.

Since, you know, the world is the very essence of perfection where a cop's mistake on not spinning out the suspect makes them eligible for the driver's murder.

And it would have made more sense if you were capable of writing coherently.

What's not to get? Why the hell would you think I was talking about the victims?

As you increase the complexity of the situation, the judgement of the event becomes more complex. Not everything is so simple, my young friend.

Well, at least you did what I wanted, which was to not answer it.

Like I said. If the fault lies with the hostage taker, then punish him.

Your standards are so out of place, the cops are screwed regardless of what they do.

Now why would I say that?

Because just like these cops, they did nothing to cause the accident.

You just said the hostage taker began killing out of the blue.

Kind of like the wreck.

Out of the blue means without any prior warning, and no one could see it coming.

When in a hostage situation, you have assume something will go wrong, just as a police chase.

This is different than the chase and crash.

Not really.

Any cop who knows the area should automatically assume that civilians are going to be there and are going to be at risk,

Like a negotiator.

and that the cops should have taken action as soon as possible to stop the U-Haul before anyone was hurt. But they didn't.

They first have to have permission to do so.

And the cops DIDN'T stop the U-Haul at the multiple chances they had. They DIDN'T try. No roadblocks, no spike strips, no nothing. Just chasing after him, for twenty miles.

20 miles? That's fucking it?

20 miles at 80-100 miles an hour is nothing you damn moron.

Police chases have lasted for hours!

It's ridiculous that none of the police from here to Gurnee at any one point in time set up a roadblock or anything that would have stopped the U-Haul.

Yeah, it's like they can predict where he's going to turn.

But the cops let it escalate to the point where the U-Haul got into towns and local traffic.

They have no idea where he's going and they have only about 8 minutes to get in front of him, set up a road block or a spike trip.

Dude, that's such a small amount of time, it's not even funny.

And you're right. HE didn't take the warning and didn't stop. And now he's in jail, likely for the rest of his life.

I'm talking about the god damn topic story you retarded, little shit.

[SolInvictus]

while the driver is the one at fault i think this is the second of such incidents which is why people are complaining.

[UWDarDar17]

At 6/4/07 11:35 PM, Memorize wrote: I'm talking about the god damn topic story you retarded, little shit.

And I'm talking about the story I posted, you half-brained dumbass little twat.

I said about the topic story:

Now, as for this case, my question is this: how long was the chase? Was is two miles? Ten? Twenty? If there was enough time to plan for this hooligan coming through a street and stopping him, then the police should have done something. They should be reprimanded, and possibly sued, in this case.

If, however, the crash was only after a couple miles, then there's no way the police can plan for something like that, and they should not be sued or reprimanded.

Do not presume that my standards are messed up. From my point of view, your standards are ridiculously messed up to the point of inhumanity. To each his own.

I clearly don't agree with your view of this situation, and you clearly don't agree with mine. No one is right, no one is wrong.

There is no right or wrong in this case. This is a matter of opinion. It is not science. We only see the situation through different lenses.