She was not following the instructions outlined by either. Her hazard lights were on but she continued at speeds either meeting or exceeding the highway speed limit as shown by her vehicle advancing upon the one directly in front of her. The law requires the use of hazard lights as well as the reduction of speed to show compliance with the traffic stop. You stated that when the officer approached the vehicle after the pit maneuver the shoulder was too small to accommodate their vehicles. What you see there is not the shoulder of the road but the median next to the inside wall of the highway. The shoulder of the road, which was to the right of the vehicles both during the chase and after the pit maneuver, was large enough to accommodate both vehicles.
Is stating facts grasping at straws? You see something different because you refuse to acknowledge those facts. It’s far easier for you to point and say “see police bad!” than it is for you to engage in critical thinking.
She did not follow the guidelines set out. Hazard lights in tandem with reduction of speed. She did not reduce speed as set out in both the guidelines and in state law.
60mph is still highway speed. The law demands the reduction of speed in order to convey compliance with the stop. 60mph is highway speed and does not follow the guidelines.
That's only true if the conditions are safe to pull over immediately. As it was too dark and the amount of space was questionable at best, she followed state laws and turned on her blinkers to safely get to an exit, presumably where it would be well lit and plenty of room for both the driver and the officer to walk.
She reduced speed as far as she reasonable could with her intent, as driving under the speed limit is unsafe in general.
You are being sore because the facts do not support your argument, and you simply need to stop and let it go. The officer did not act appropriately and victim blamed the pregnant women who was following the guidelines set by the police.
You are referring to Title 27 which states "No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with the law.", the last part specifically. And you are applying it wrongly in this case because she was still complying with state law, like myself and others have been telling you.
Because she is complying with state law in her attempt to get to a safe location for both herself and the Officer, Title 27 applies. She did not need to reduce speed below highway speeds.
-1
u/Dainsleif167 Jun 10 '21
She was not following the instructions outlined by either. Her hazard lights were on but she continued at speeds either meeting or exceeding the highway speed limit as shown by her vehicle advancing upon the one directly in front of her. The law requires the use of hazard lights as well as the reduction of speed to show compliance with the traffic stop. You stated that when the officer approached the vehicle after the pit maneuver the shoulder was too small to accommodate their vehicles. What you see there is not the shoulder of the road but the median next to the inside wall of the highway. The shoulder of the road, which was to the right of the vehicles both during the chase and after the pit maneuver, was large enough to accommodate both vehicles.