This is bullcrap, guy gets out of murder charge for being a cop

[Bitter Clinger]

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/172788-know-texting-driving-kills-cop-wont-charged-fatal-accident/


Using a handheld device (http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/172788-know-texting-driving-kills-cop-wont-charged-fatal-accident/#) to text while driving is not only unsafe, but against the law (http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/cellphone_laws.html) in most states. So why isn’t a law enforcement officer (http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/172788-know-texting-driving-kills-cop-wont-charged-fatal-accident/#) who killed a bicyclist while he was operating a mobile device (http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/172788-know-texting-driving-kills-cop-wont-charged-fatal-accident/#) being charged in the death?

Los Angeles Daily News (http://www.dailynews.com/general-news/20140827/in-calabasas-death-of-cyclist-milton-olin-no-charges-against-typing-deputy) reports that an L.A. County Sheriff’s Deputy struck former Napster executive Milton Olin Jr., while Olin was cycling on Mulholland Highway near Calabasas. Deputy Andrew Wood had just left a call at a high school and was responding to a colleague on his mobile digital computer when his patrol car drifted into the bike lane.

“Wood entered the bicycle lane as a result of inattention caused by typing..” according to the declination letter prepared by the….District Attorney’s Office.
*
“Since Wood was acting within the course and scope of his duties when he began to type his response, under Vehicle Code (http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/172788-know-texting-driving-kills-cop-wont-charged-fatal-accident/#) section 23123.5, he acted lawfully.”
*
The law does not prohibit officers from using an electronic wireless communications device (http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/172788-know-texting-driving-kills-cop-wont-charged-fatal-accident/#) in the performance of their duties….Furthermore, prosecutors said it was “reasonable” that Wood would have felt that an immediate response was necessary so that a Calabasas deputy wouldn’t unnecessarily respond.
However, a local cycling activist takes exception with the decision.

Eric Bruins, planning and policy director for the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, said….“Just because the law allows someone to do something while driving doesn’t mean they are allowed to do something unsafely while driving. Hitting someone from behind is very clear evidence that whatever was going on in that car was not safe and should have been considered negligent.”
Due to the potential hazard to pedestrians, cyclists or other motorists, should law enforcement officers be required to abide by the same “hands-free” laws that civilians do?

[Bailey Guns]

Sounds like they need to change the law. Not saying it wasn't the officer's fault but, if the law makes what he did legal then he really can't be charged. I know it wasn't that way here when I was working the streets. There was no exemption and department policy prohibited being distracted by operating your computer terminal while driving. That would've been squarely on the officer's shoulders.

[OneGuy67]

I agree with Bailey. Most agencies have a policy of not typing on the MDT while moving, but it is usually violated. The officer would be held accountable here if the same incident occurred.

[sniper7]

One more reason to not ride your bike on the road/highway, even with a bike lane. Look around you at stop lights and 50+% of the time the person next to you is either texting or talking on their phone.

[ben4372]

This is tough. I'm sure the DA could have charged him with a crime. But I would love to rub a cyclist every once in a while.

[Irving]

Doesn't matter if what he was doing was legal or not. The legality of the issue does not remove the fact that he was liable for the accident.

[TheGrey]

Voice to text. It's a thing.

[rondog]

WTF - don't they have radios anymore?

[Bailey Guns]

The other thing to keep in mind is he's still subject to a civil suit...just like anyone else would be.

[wctriumph]

^^^^^^ This in a BIG way! The officer, department, county, etc are about to get hammered big time for negligence in causing a death.

[RCCrawler]

Do as I say, not as I do.

[8Ring]

Let's turn to facts around. Assume that you, the citizen, are driving and texting. Texting while driving isn't illegal per se in your state. Assume that you are distracted while texting and driving, run into a parked police car, and kill the police officer. I bet you would be charged with careless or reckless driving causing death. The fact that texting while driving is not per se illegal, people are charged quite often with careless or reckless driving causing death. Except perhaps Deputy Sheriffs in LA County.

I would be very interested to see what departmental discipline this Deputy will face.

Don't worry, the taxpayers will foot the bill for the civil suit.

[kawiracer14]

Remember folks, in Colorado its mostly legal to kill a cyclist with your car anyways. Sure maybe 3 months in prison or some community service, but nothing severe.

[speedysst]

Remember folks, in Colorado its mostly legal to kill a cyclist with your car anyways. Sure maybe 3 months in prison or some community service, but nothing severe.

Or 6 years in a halfway house for killing a motorcycle cop by driving on the wrong side of the road trying to pass people.

[sniper7]

Remember folks, in Colorado its mostly legal to kill a cyclist with your car anyways. Sure maybe 3 months in prison or some community service, but nothing severe.

Im surprised more people don't hit some of the cyclists on purpose for being assholes and riding where they shouldn't be

[Duman]

As a cyclist, both motorized and not, it's a jungle out there. Having had many 'near misses' by car drivers not paying attention (texting, applying makeup, or otherwise distracted) or the average douchebag who thinks anything on two wheels belongs on the sidewalk, it's challenging.

Yes, there are cyclists who disobey traffic laws, and they piss me off. There are bikers who run in and out of traffic, creating unsafe situations. I'm neither of these, and if you choose to hit me, be very, very sure before you do.

[Bailey Guns]

Don't worry, the taxpayers will foot the bill for the civil suit.

Don't be so sure. If the officer is found to have violated departmental policy he may be on his own...the department's insurance may not provide him representation. The department might be sued but the officer can be sued in his official capacity as well as in a personal capacity.

[Bitter Clinger]

I was a bit into my cups when I posted this, didn't mean to come across as anti-cop, I'm not. What if I did this cause of answering a text from work? I'd be in prison, no matter the state. I HATE bicycles on the side of a busy street, but I give them alot of room, often more than the lane of oncoming traffic I have to swerve into to not hit them (keep it on the trail!). Dont mean I want to run em' over.

[MarkCO]

“Just because the law allows someone to do something while driving doesn’t mean they are allowed to do something unsafely while driving. Hitting someone from behind is very clear evidence that whatever was going on in that car was not safe and should have been considered negligent.”

A lane change is legal, a lane change in which I strike another car is not legal. I hope the DA gets sued as well as this was just wrong.

[Duman]

I was a bit off when I posted last night, no offense intended at anyone.

[Squeeze]

http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i445/TangoDownPro/CyclistFunny_zps251ef0d9.jpg (http://s1094.photobucket.com/user/TangoDownPro/media/CyclistFunny_zps251ef0d9.jpg.html)

[Duman]

[harley]
Yep.

[8Ring]

Don't be so sure. If the officer is found to have violated departmental policy he may be on his own...the department's insurance may not provide him representation. The department might be sued but the officer can be sued in his official capacity as well as in a personal capacity.

i disagree. At least in Colorado, if the officer is acting in the course and scope of his or her employment (e.g. on duty and performing police work), the government and the officer will be sued. The fact that an officer might have violated some departmental policy does not mean that the actions were outside the course and scope of employment. Examples of actions outside the course and scope of employment would be sexually assaulting someone while on duty, settling a personal grudge while on duty, etc. As a result, the government and the officer are sued, the government settles the case or pays the judgment, and the taxpayers foot the bill.

In California I bet that the plaintiffs' lawyers and the police unions are fairly influential in the state capitol I suspect they have things arranged so that the government (taxpayers) will pay virtually all settlements and the officer would be personally liable only in the rarest situations.

[Bailey Guns]

i disagree. At least in Colorado, if the officer is acting in the course and scope of his or her employment (e.g. on duty and performing police work), the government and the officer will be sued. The fact that an officer might have violated some departmental policy does not mean that the actions were outside the course and scope of employment. Examples of actions outside the course and scope of employment would be sexually assaulting someone while on duty, settling a personal grudge while on duty, etc. As a result, the government and the officer are sued, the government settles the case or pays the judgment, and the taxpayers foot the bill.

It doesn't mean the officer was acting outside the course of employment, that's true. But it gives the insurance company an out when procedures are violated.

I can tell you from personal experience that an officer can be sued individually even when he/she did nothing wrong...because it happened to me. $16M worth and 7 days in federal district court. Fortunately the department and the insurance carrier knew it was bullshit and backed me 100%. And so did the jury. But I still had to deal with fallout from some in the community who saw it as evidence that the department (and I) was corrupt.

Most people who think that way have no clue what officers go through on a daily basis and how quickly their careers can be ruined by some scumbag who sees dollar signs.

[centrarchidae]

A lane change is legal, a lane change in which I strike another car is not legal. I hope the DA gets sued as well as this was just wrong.
That'll be the day. DA's have immunity almost the way judges have immunity. An exercise of prosecutorial discretion, even a stupid one, won't breach that.