Turnpike U-turn crash

[TUalum0982]

quote:Originally posted by Wilbur

quote:Originally posted by patric

quote:Originally posted by Wilbur

Police don't determine FAULT at a wreck.  They report who committed what traffic violations, whether it be one driver of both drivers (which they have done here).  It is up to insurance companies to determine fault

If this wreck were summed up as "Failure to yield to an emergency vehicle" it would provide a pretty distorted view of the facts, wouldnt it?

You missed the point that the OHP claim of this occurring inside a construction zone was false.  They really hurt their credibility on this case, rather than use it as something everyone could learn from.

I've not seen the report, so I don't know about the construction zone.  Needless to say, ODOT determines construction zones, not OHP, and I've often wondered why some places are designated that way.  ODOT could surely confirm or deny the construction zone portion.

quote: If this wreck were summed up as "Failure to yield to an emergency vehicle" it would provide a pretty distorted view of the facts, wouldnt it?

I'm not sure what you mean.  I thought the quote by OHP that their trooper was ultimately the cause of the crash put the responsibility on them.  But, they were also correct in identifying other violations, mainly the brakes on the truck.

hes saying that if the report identified the violation of "failure to yield to an emergency vehicle" that would be distorted.  The insurance would look at that and more times then not immediately put the truck driver at fault.  There are two sides to every story, I think sometimes people forget that.

Also, I think a solution to the turnpikes is to replace the concrete barriers with the steel cable type system they recently put up on parts of I44 and also along the southbound ramp to 169 from 51E.  

I think this would alleviate some of the problem of having a blind spot, etc.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

He's wit da po-po 5-0

You know, that means nothing to me. [8D]

The filth!

I get it now.

[patric]

It's got to be painful for the family and friends of the killed truck driver to see this:

[Hoss]

It's got to be painful for the family and friends of the killed truck driver to see this:

Wow.

Wouldn't you think it would be painful for the family and friends of the trooper also?  I'm sure they didn't want his name to memorialize part of a turnpike he was killed in a crash on.

I have to say that's a little insensitive.  I would think it would be painful for all involved.

[heironymouspasparagus]

So, just to get this straight...the OHP trooper caused a wreck by doing an improper maneuver that killed two people and gets a memorial sign posted.  The driver who did nothing wrong gets blamed and no memorial consideration.

Mmmm...got it!  Just wanted to understand.  It's Oklahloma.

[Breadburner]

Far to many memorials for to many things now a days.....

[patric]

I would think it would be painful for all involved.

Most definitely.  I cant imagine what reasoning was used to convince the trooper's family this would be the best way to remember a lost loved one, but I really doubt this was for them.

The wrongful death suit was filed, http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=071205_1_A13_spanc18175 
but the trail goes cold from there.
The Ohio family may have ended up signing away their right to publicly speak about the wreck in exchange for some paltry settlement.

Shameful.

[heironymouspasparagus]

That news article says that the trooper was in front of the truck when he started the u-turn.  I bet I have put close to 100,000 miles (seriously) on that turnpike since I started driving - starting in 1965 - 1966, and have been trying to review every time I have seen a trooper in the passing lane, with a truck OR car behind him, where the truck or car was doing 15 mph OVER the posted speed limit.  Doesn't happen.  If anything, people will slow down 5 to 10 mph SLOWER than the trooper they are following. 

Side note - if the truck WAS doing 15 mph over through the work zone, that also means that the trooper was also doing 15 mph over, right up to the point where he made the improper u-turn left.

Just saying....

[patric]

That news article says that the trooper was in front of the truck when he started the u-turn.  I bet I have put close to 100,000 miles (seriously) on that turnpike since I started driving - starting in 1965 - 1966, and have been trying to review every time I have seen a trooper in the passing lane, with a truck OR car behind him, where the truck or car was doing 15 mph OVER the posted speed limit.  Doesn't happen.  If anything, people will slow down 5 to 10 mph SLOWER than the trooper they are following. 

Side note - if the truck WAS doing 15 mph over through the work zone, that also means that the trooper was also doing 15 mph over, right up to the point where he made the improper u-turn left.

Just saying....

The "15 mph over" was part of OHP's claim much later that the accident occurred in a work zone, otherwise, the truck driver's speed was legal.
Photos at the scene dont back up that assertion, though.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Sad for everyone concerned.

[guido911]

Sad for everyone concerned.

That's right. And whether our resident cop hater likes it or not (legitimate question), we lost a law enforcement asset and his family lost a loved one.

And patric, look at my avatar. The nerve of the law enforcement officer glaring at the VP.

[patric]

Better switch to decaf before you use up all that raving hatred on an on-election thread.

[guido911]

Better switch to decaf before you use up all that raving hatred on an on-election thread.

Do you ever listen to yourself?