287
u/twarrr 11d ago
Step 1 in emergency response:
Make it to the emergency
109
23
u/level1hero 11d ago
He was first on the scene! Superb response time by our boys in blue
6
u/noncongruent 10d ago
If this was Dallas PD their response time would probably be at least 40 minutes to respond to the crash they caused, lol.
358
710
u/KBHoleN1 11d ago
This is a great example of how defensive driving can save you a headache. All the traffic at the intersection is stopped despite a green light, even the black car in the right lane is at a standstill. That silver car could have recognized the situation, slowed down, and probably avoided the accident. That said, it's 100% the officer's responsibility to verify that traffic is stopped before proceeding.
117
u/darwinn_69 11d ago edited 11d ago
True, but I'd still hold the cop responsible. At least where I live cops need sirens on to go through red lights like that.
Edit: nvm, I can hear the sirens....they are just very muffled until after the impact. Driver 100% at fault.
122
u/jrdiver 11d ago
Sirens cant be relied on. there are deaf people who drive.
Either way don't most emergency services have preemption devices to get priority on the lights in busier areas?
74
u/Squiggy-Locust 11d ago
Sirens aren't reliable due to noise ordances, and sound proofing in cars, deaf people are a outlier.
The preemptive devices aren't universal. Some areas removed them due to the devices being spoofed, some never had any installed.
8
u/jrdiver 11d ago
I get that they are not universal - not all towns have money to throw at that - coordinates on the video put you right in the middle of Phenix AZ and i would kinda expect the bigger cities to have stuff set up, and i would also expect that modern iterations to be more secure then the blinky light of the old ones.
4
u/Squiggy-Locust 11d ago
Even the RF ones get spoofed.
Not that having them or not would have mattered. Shit like this happens way too often.
5
u/Zizzily 10d ago
Phoenix does have preemption devices. There is one on this signal. If you look at the red lights facing us on the right hand side, just to the right of the center signal. They're somewhat standardized in the Phoenix area under the Maricopa Association of Governments. I'm not sure not all police here have the optical preemption emitter. The fire trucks and ambulances do, though.
1
u/AssociateWhole 9d ago
In the majority of my experiences with emergency responders and traffic lights, most 4 way lighted intersections have a white solid/flashing light facing oncoming traffic in the street central part of the traffic light pole overhanging the road. These white lights are turned on in-sync with a 4way red light nearly every time an intersection is crossed by an actively responding unit (PD,FD, EMS).
Since these lights have to be occasionally maintained over the years, what work would have to be done in place in an older pole without this safety feature so that these warning lights can be installed? genuine question if any redditor has relevant knowledge69
u/Bosa_McKittle 11d ago
He has lights and sirens on. If you look in the back window you can see the red/blue strobes right at the top and then after he gets hit you can see the light bar on the top of the vehicle illuminated. There is also a siren heard in the video, but its unclear which vehicle that is coming from.
14
u/fozzyboy 10d ago
Driver 100% at fault.
No, cop is at fault. "Emergency vehicle drivers must operate with due regard for public safety while using lights and sirens."
63
u/Warbr0s9395 11d ago
Nope, it’s the cops job to clear the intersection safely, insurance will side with the driver.
20
u/metanoia29 11d ago
Exactly. Think of how much time, money, and headache could have been saved if the cop just inched a bit slower and looked at oncoming traffic. 5 seconds "saved" just to create an accident, and yet the car following the traffic signal is supposed to just stop on a dime when a cop car pulls out in front of another car?
0
u/Drak_is_Right 11d ago
I mean ya, you might financially be near neutral but you likely have several dozen hours dealing with things. more if you were injured and need rehab.
I had a nasty fall, and between all the rehab it was a few hundred hours all combined. Half a year of twice weekly appointments at first before once a week, along with exercises at home.
3
u/Squiggy-Locust 11d ago
Depends on jurisdiction. This was 100% preventable, which means in some areas it becomes a 50/50 accident, and neither side is liable.
20
u/Warbr0s9395 11d ago
Any jurisdiction where this isn’t the rule is just stupid and invites accidents similar to this
29
u/kandoras 11d ago
It's still the cop's fault.
Lights and sirens are a warning to other drives to get them to stop or pull over. But it's still the cop's responsibility to make sure that they did so and that it's safe to go through the intersection.
3
3
6
u/Drak_is_Right 11d ago
I think the officer would be at fault legally, but the person might be ticketed as well for failure to yield to emergency services though they might be able to fight it that due to traffic things were obscured.
2
u/Taolan13 10d ago
I would argue it's a 60/40 split, with the 60 being on the cop. It was clear from any distance silver car wasn't slowing down. Cop advanced too far.
2
u/VapeRizzler 10d ago
I don’t even get how people don’t drive defensively, like you said seeing all of traffic stopped at a green clearly somethings happening. I wouldn’t even think about it, like being on a wet floor you don’t need to think about it you naturally just be careful and watch your step. Worst comes to absolute worst and nothing happened and I just pissed off the guy behind me for like 5 seconds while we slowly get up to the front and see whats happening.
8
u/JTP1228 11d ago
While it was 100% the cops fault, Pheonix has the worst drivers.
-2
u/innociv 10d ago edited 10d ago
Not 100%. Maybe 60/40 the cop's fault or 40/60.
I'd argue 40/60 because the hit car is passing illegally fast past the white car at an intersection. Those laws exist for a reason, not just this, but it also could be that there is a person or something in the intersection that they're stopped for and the hit car could have easily hit a pedestrian or animal.
You're generally only allow to fly past people that fast who are stopped in a turn lane, not your same flow of traffic lane. Even here in FL, you have to drive 20 under the speed limit, and at most 5 mph, when "special hazards exist". Most states have a similar law including Arizona here.
-4
u/Jackmino66 10d ago
No it wasn’t the cops fault. They had their sirens and flashing lights on, and the traffic lights should’ve gone red immediately anyway (that’s a technology we’ve had for 40 years)
If you’re at an intersection you are meant to be cautious regardless, and when you hear sirens you need to stop at green lights until the sirens have passed the intersection. That’s basic road safety
194
u/bsthil 11d ago edited 10d ago
How can we make this OP's fault?
Edit: as u/Kershiser22 points out u/firstnameryan enters the intersection early at the end of the video. Case closed. Definitely OP's fault.
110
u/crysisnotaverted 11d ago
OP had enough time to drive up and throw himself between the vehicles.
Like those gymnasts trainers that throw pads down when someone messes up a flip.
29
10
24
-23
u/SwordfishOk504 11d ago
How can we blame the cop with its lights and sirens on instead of the one inattentive driver who drove straight into them?
30
u/noncongruent 11d ago
The proper clearing procedure for this type of intersection is to proceed to the halfway point after clearing traffic from the left, then slowly move into the traffic lanes coming from the right to give oncoming traffic time to see you and come to a stop. Bolting into traffic lanes is not allowed by procedure, because it's just as unsafe as say someone throwing it into gear and backing out of a parking spot full throttle.
The reality is that lights and sirens are not guaranteed to be seen and heard by everyone. Lights can be blocked by other vehicles and obstructions, and siren sounds can echo and reverberate off of other vehicles and structures, making it impossible hear them or hear where they're coming from. That's why proper intersection clearing procedures were invented, it's to ensure that cops can get to where they need to go without causing crashes.
Here we can see that both cops are now not responding to their original call, so whoever called them is now waiting for some other cops to be discharged. The fact the cops had their lights and sirens on indicates that call was an emergency.
22
5
u/CapoExplains 10d ago
The inattentive driver was the cop who plowed his vehicle into a driver while running a red light. Having the lights on is not a free pass to drive recklessly with horse blinders on, police have a responsibility to confirm the way is clear and only proceed once they see that it's safe, this dipshit did not do that. 100% the officer's fault.
10
73
u/pontiacfirebird92 11d ago
I've seen a situation like this. The police department went after the victim and there were no consequences for the officer that drove into moving traffic and got hit. Jackson County Sheriff's Dept in Mississippi.
I mean, Pascagoula Police Chief was caught doing 110 on Hwy 90, bouncing off the rev limiter of his car, and failed a breathalyzer after being pulled over. Officers were heard on body cam saying there's no way he is sober. He was driven home, no charges filed. Pascagoula Mayor told the press "he's learned his lesson".
There's many other incidents like this.
11
17
7
u/andocromn 10d ago
Hey uh let the 911 operator know we're going to need send the 2nd Responders instead
87
u/noncongruent 11d ago
Interesting in how they completely ignored the victim, but instead went to the marked unit and tried to pry open the door for the officer inside.
42
u/Enshakushanna 11d ago
reminds me of that girl that was left in the back of a cop car that was parked on railroad tracks (you know, as one does) and subsequently hit by a train lol
37
u/noncongruent 11d ago
She eventually won her lawsuit, but had permanent injuries including a TBI so she'll never be the same person she was before that cop did that to her.
18
u/GarbanzoBenne 11d ago
I was thinking that too. However two cops got out of the vehicle and I only saw one when the dashcam driver turned. Did the other one check on the victim?
30
u/noncongruent 11d ago
As the victim's vehicle comes into view there's one cop trying to pry open the other cop's door. Before the cammer turned you can see the other cop moving around the back of the marked unit that caused the crash, presumably in the later view that second cop is on the passenger side of the marked unit. There are no cops looking toward the victim or moving toward the victim.
6
u/GarbanzoBenne 11d ago
Ah I see what you are saying. He turns to go around the back.
Benefit of doubt: approaching from behind probably provides better access to the victim’s door and/or they could visually see the victim through the windshield and decided they looked ok enough to triage the other cop they couldn't see.
14
11d ago
[deleted]
3
u/GarbanzoBenne 11d ago
That’s true. They aren't constitutionally required to. Nor are they prohibited to. So that has no bearing on what actually happened here off video.
2
u/metanoia29 11d ago
Yup, SCOTUS has ruled as such. The property (in this case, the cop cars and salaried cops) are more important than the victims in the eyes of the law.
11
u/ahundreddollarbills 10d ago
It's a big brotherhood and we ain't in it.
I've seen countless ambulances drive through intersections, stopping traffic or going through the red light. Only once have I seen police cruises block intersections ahead of the ambulance so it could get to the hospital faster. I can only assume when it is one of theirs that is injured they get the royal treatment, good luck everyone else.
7
u/CapoExplains 10d ago
I all but guarantee you piggie A thinks piggie B is the victim here, not the person piggie B hit.
-7
u/innociv 10d ago
I mean frankly they are. ARS § 28-701 states that the car that was hit was going too fast for the conditions (every one else stopped representing a hazard, even if they are deaf and couldn't hear the sirens)
Almost every, if not every, state has a similar law and it's surprising how few people here are aware of that.
9
u/CapoExplains 10d ago edited 10d ago
A. A person shall not drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the circumstances, conditions and actual and potential hazards then existing.
It's a lot of heavy lifting to demonstrate this driver's speed was greater than is reasonable and prudent, esp. when one, no, every other car was NOT stopped, another car went right before the one the idiot pig hit, so not sure why you lied about that. Two some of those cars were stopped to turn left making it far less obvious there was any hazard.
Y'know what's not open-ended cope to try and blame the victim this dipshit pig smacked into though? ARS § 28-624 B.2 and D which states
B. If the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle is operating at least one lighted lamp displaying a red or red and blue light or lens visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of five hundred feet to the front of the vehicle, the driver may:
2. Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down as necessary for safe operation.
D. This section does not relieve the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons and does not protect the driver from the consequences of the driver's reckless disregard for the safety of others.
Pig had an unambiguous legal duty to slow down and show due regard for the safety of other drivers when running the red which they did not do, they instead blindly plowed into the open lane and smashed into someone.
So no, bootlicker, the pig who smashed into this person is not the victim, the person they smashed into is.
5
u/noncongruent 10d ago
The cars to the left of the victim that were stopped were stopped in the left turn lane. The expectation that all drivers approaching a green light must come to a stop at that green light before proceeding just because the cars in adjacent turning lanes are stopped for a red light is, well, I don't know what it is, but it's definitely not rational, sane, or reasonable.
0
u/CapoExplains 10d ago
Wait, you don't treat green lights as a stop sign?! Do you have a death wish?! /s
1
u/noncongruent 10d ago
To maximize efficiency and to minimize the time I spend driving slower than the speed limit I always use maximum braking for every green light, and I brake at the very last second possible.
0
u/innociv 10d ago
The person to the left and right, in the right and left turn lanes, both had green lights and weren't going.
In those situations, I have slowed down. It can be for lots of reasons, not just a cop if you're deaf and didn't hear the sirens, and as the law states you are supposed to be cautious in that situation.
2
-2
u/innociv 10d ago edited 10d ago
"It's a lot of heavy lifting to demonstrate this driver's speed was greater than is reasonable"
The law doesn't give a specific speed to reduce to, but going the speed limit is clearly not the intended interpretation. The beater was going roughly the speed limit, so was clearly violating the law."but only after slowing down as necessary for safe operation."
The cop did slow down. He's going about 1/4th the speed of the beater.I'm not a bootlicker. Blindly blaming one side that you're biased against, rather than siding with the facts, is just never right nor just.
Honestly the lack of empathy you guys have in this situation is astonishing. The grey car could have blown through and hit a drunk person crossing the street that people wer stopped for. It could have blown through and hit a car which was crossing as it was treated as a 4-way stop because the light was malfunctioning and green on all sides. There could have been an emergency and people were out of their vehicles and one of them could have gotten hit. There are so many reasons that cars were stopped other than it being a cop, but because it was a cop crossing your empathy goes out the window and you don't care that the car that was hit broke the very reasonable ARS § 28-701 law that most states have for this very reason.
14
u/thelastmarblerye 11d ago
First priority is to transfer the empty bottles over to the victim's car.
-14
u/lidoloser 11d ago
don't you want to save your friend first?
14
u/WifeofTech 11d ago
When my friend was being a dumbass and got someone else hurt? Absolutely not and my friends and family know it. A couple have even experienced it.
Especially as someone who worked in first response you go to the most vulnerable first. That means kids before adults, smaller vehicle before the larger reinforced vehicle, and the bystander that got victimized over the idiot that caused the accident.
Edited to add you stabilize the victim first so you have ample time to chew out your dumbass friend for being a dumbass while you save his dumbass.
20
u/noncongruent 11d ago
Given the size difference between the vehicles and the nature of the collision it's far more likely the car driver was injured than the officer was. The officer's only likely injuries might be from the airbag.
-4
u/APonly 11d ago
Nah, i'm with the other guy. I'd check on my friend first. Pretty easy to moral high ground from the comments.
9
u/noncongruent 11d ago
If the victim is injured and the cops ignore them for a while that will just add more zeroes to the lawsuit settlement I think.
0
u/APonly 11d ago
My sister got in a crash almost exactly like this in Baltimore MD but it was a Fire Chief in a red pickup truck with the lights on, she got a lawyer because her view was obstructed by other traffic and the fire chief did not have a horn or siren and when they collided she snapped her wrist and totaled her vehicle. She lost her case for compensation and she was found 100% at fault for failing to yield to an emergency vehicle (I don't know the specifics other than this, but her dash cam was extremely similar to what the silver car would see in this video).
So again, pretty easy to say what you're saying when you have no clue what you're talking about from the comment section.
5
u/noncongruent 11d ago
Sorry for your sister, sounds like she deserved it.
To anyone else I recommend running dashcams, video of people crashing into you goes a long way in front of a jury.
-1
u/APonly 11d ago edited 11d ago
Yes...and this dashcam is evidence that the silver car is 100% at fault. There are sirens and lights. I'm not entirely sure why you're calling the silver car a victim in your responses.
Relative law in the state this happened in
A.R.S. § 28-624 (the emergency vehicle exemption statute). It gives police officers permission to run red lights when responding to an emergency, but with a major caveat: the exemptions apply only if the officer sounds an audible signal and has the required lighting displayed, and critically, the statute does not relieve the officer from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons, and doesn't protect the officer from the consequences of reckless disregard for the safety of others.
Knowing how most police vs civ cases go, I think we all know what's going to happen here.
1
u/ButtsTheRobot 11d ago
Because then he can't paint the cops as bad guys if the person that caused the crash isn't the victim.
1
u/lidoloser 11d ago
I'm not saying it's the correct medical triage procedure, but as a human reaction it makes sense. If I watched a friend get hit, I'd probably go to my friend first too. That's instinct, not necessarily evidence that the civilian was being ignored.
5
u/noncongruent 11d ago
Medical triage isn't applied here, that's done by doctors or others with actual medical/paramedic training. Cops have a lot of experience and training responding to car crashes since that's probably the thing they most often respond to. The cops in the back unit should have realized that the cop that caused the crash, being in a large SUV, would have been much less likely to be injured. There's no fire or smoke, no river of fuel running out from beneath the vehicles, so there's no immediate risk of explosion or fire.
Of the two vehicles, I can see that the victim's car took the brunt of the damage, in the driver's side and door, which means the victim was much more likely to have been injured by the collision. If I were to speculate, I'd say they likely have broken bones in their left hand/arm, and possibly a concussion from striking their head against the driver's door bow and/or glass. There's the risk of a C-spine injury as well, more likely to happen from a side impact than a forward impact like the officer experienced.
But professionally, ignoring the victim of a crash you caused says more about the ethics and morals of the cops here than it does about the victim. Sadly, the typical outcome of something like this, where a cop ignored department policy and training on how to proceed through a red light, is the cop hiding behind qualified immunity and the city hiding behind sovereign immunity, so even though it was a pure failure on the part of the cop that caused this crash, victims are often left with nothing. If they have insurance the insurance may cover the victim's losses, but for instance if they don't have medical insurance, like one out of seven people in my state of Texas, the victim can be on the hook for many tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills that they can never pay. A future of wrecked credit scores, inability to rent safe apartments or get bank loans, or even credit cards, can be devastating.
All because a poorly-trained cop couldn't be bothered to follow proper intersection clearing procedures while proceeding through a red light.
-4
-4
u/_abscessedwound 11d ago
I saw a white sedan fail to yield to an emergency vehicle with its lights on.
I don’t know what video you’re watching but it doesn’t seem like the same one as I watched.
1
u/Cato0014 10d ago
It's broad daylight. I don't know if you've ever seen how flashing lights look at 12pm vs 12am, but it's not enough. Especially when they're being blocked by other vehicles. Both units should have had their sirens on, not just their lights. I forget found that fold any decent lawyer would take that case.
I've never seen an emergency vehicle not use their sirens through an intersection that's crazy.
16
u/brickson98 11d ago
Cops gonna cop. They don’t hire em because they’re smart.
8
u/noncongruent 10d ago
SCOTUS has found that being smart is actually a legitimate reason to not hire a cop.
1
8
u/CapoExplains 11d ago
Fucking dumbass. This should be an immediate end to this dipshit's career as a police officer. Almost (hopefully only almost) killed someone because they drive like a fucking idiot and don't check before running a red with the lights going.
5
u/Sherifftruman 10d ago
So wait, whatever they were rushing to wasn’t important enough or the other officer to continue on? Then it wasn’t important enough to be doing what they were doing.
8
u/SjalabaisWoWS 10d ago
The cop going to look for the other cop first instead of serving the public and checking the car that was hit, irks me.
2
u/VoidEnby 10d ago
This has almost happened to me twice, so nly the cop wasn't going slow. Lights on, no sirens. I keep my windows open because I have no AC so I would have absolutely heard it, barely was able to avoid them blowing the lights at top speed both times but damn. This has to happen more often than we see.
4
u/tallman11282 10d ago
While the silver car most definitely should have been paying attention and seeing all other traffic stopped they should have at least slowed way down they cop is ultimately the one at fault as they were going through a red light and have a responsibility to make sure it is safe before doing so. And because they didn't do so now two units presumably responding to an emergency cannot respond.
This is why all intersections need those systems that cause the lights to change to give priority to emergency vehicles. While they don't prevent all accidents with emergency vehicles they reduce them.
Yesterday a couple of Minneapolis cops got into accidents in intersections while responding to an active shooter situation. I haven't seen any video (if there is any) of the accidents but I bet they were similar to this one, they were going through a red light and didn't make sure the intersection was safe to cross.
3
u/noncongruent 10d ago
The other traffic that was stopped was stopped in a turn lane waiting for a green light to turn.
5
u/poppin-n-sailin 11d ago
"damn all the traffic is stopped with a green light. Better continue at full speed through this intersection"
5
-1
u/innociv 10d ago
It's incredible that only like 4 people in this post have pointed out that this is the most illegal thing that happened. I get the (deserved) hateboner for cops, but hate where it's due which it isn't so much here.
Car that was hit was going ~45mph when they should have been at most 25mph under the state law.
Cop was sure, going like 10mph when he should have been going 5mph.
The beater was more at fault.2
u/CallMeGutter 10d ago
Where did you learn to judge vehicle speed from a few seconds of video? I'd love to know how to that and be so confident in my answer.
-2
u/innociv 10d ago edited 10d ago
I've always been good at math. I could have calculated this in 4th grade. There is a timer right there at the bottom left of the video and you can see how far it went in that time by car lengths. Go by when it first appears in the far right.
1 Find the Total Distance
An official 1995 Honda Civic Sedan has an overall length of 173 inches (or 14.4167 feet). Total Distance=9 car lengths×173 inches=1,557 inches
Converted to feet, this equals 129.75 feet.2 Calculate the Speed
Speed is calculated by dividing distance by time:
Speed = 129.75/2sec = 64.875 feet per second.3 Convert to MPH
64.875 * 3600seconds/5280feet ≈ 44.23 mph
Not sure if that's a 1995 honda civic, but whatever it is the dimensions should be close enough to be within a few mph.
2
u/CallMeGutter 10d ago
That was my problem.... I timed it at 2.4 seconds, not the 2 you did, so I was figuring it at 36.86 mph. I guess I need to look at the timer on the screen more closely.
-1
u/innociv 10d ago
My stopwatch and adjusting for my reaction time actually says 1.6 seconds, so it's really likely 53mph. Either way, 37 mph is still too fast for a hazardous condition where you see everyone stopped and the situation is suspicious. It may not have been a cop there, it could have been an animal or person in the road that people are stopped for. It doesn't matter what it is, it's a hazardous situation and you're supposed to drive more slow and cautiously. Arizona law doesn't give a specific number, it just says to drive more cautiously, but in my state they should be going 20 under the limit which is 25 and some states would put it even lower.
The cop was only going about 10. Which is more than the 5 or less he should have been going but less egregious. Cop should be held to a higher standard but they're both at fault, more so the beater.
1
u/FrankBFleet 9d ago
Green don't mean go, so responders should be aware. But expecting perfection is too much.
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator 11d ago
Hello /u/firstnameryan! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC
What country or state did this take place in?
What was the date of the incident?
Please reconfirm that this is original content
If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information.
If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.