Officer breaks law, kills child, No Charges

Status
Not open for further replies.

KVX

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
557
Likes
1,065
WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT
Extremely distressing dash cam footage shows the moment cop hit and killed an 11-year-old boy as he crossed the street on a minibike. The recently released footage of the crash that killed Norman Hood is incredibly disturbing
– but the boy’s family wants the public to see it. Norman was riding his ‘pocket motorcycle’ across a street in Battle Creek, Michigan when he was hit by a Calhoun County Sheriff’s Deputy and thrown across the road in May 2018. He was taken to a hospital where he was pronounced dead. The deputy was driving 66mph in a 30mph zone when he hit Norman, state police said.

Michigan law allows police to break the speed limit when responding to an emergency call, but the officer did not have his lights or siren on. However, Michigan State Police said the officer was en route to an emergency call (made up to CYA?) for a burglary.

Prosecutors never charged the deputy with any crime and said the boy ‘veered’ in front of the police cruiser, adding that charges could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt

VIDEO of hitting child in link.

Horrific moment cop hit and killed 11-year-old boy on minibike

 

new guy

NES Member
Rating - 100%
57   0   0
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
21,011
Likes
14,700
Would you or I be charged if we hit this kid while doing 66 in a 30?
 

bigben111435

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
282
Likes
87
Awful situation.
But the blame is two fold.
The officer was obviously going very fast, maybe going to a call maybe not.
The rider had no lights, or even reflectors.
Blue jeans, black shirt. Tough to see.
This is much more about the handling of the boy and the situation in the immediate aftermath.
And on that front, it sounds like all parties could have been better.
Of course the police will cover him, why wouldn't they? It is not like the officer crossed two lanes to kill the kid, matter of fact the kid drives right into the left lane in front of him.
The family says "money won't bring him back" ... so they want the cop hauled off to jail and that is justice? Now you got a dead kid, and another inmate.
Tough nut here.
Just a huge kukka sammy for everyone.
 

Palladin

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
24,180
Likes
5,833
Location
Merrimack Valley
jesus, that was quick. he would have killed him if he was doing 40mph. Kid had no lights on bike and veered in front of cop and was the same height as the car's grille..
 

snax

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
4,234
Likes
3,097
Location
LA - lowell area
I don't know man. It sucks. The cop should face something....
I have an 11 year old.
He wouldn't be driving on a minibike, at dusk, on what looks like a super busy main road. On top of it he has no helmet.
Not defending the cop, but that probably would have happened if the guy was doing 45, let alone 66.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
2,608
Likes
1,865
Location
Worcester, MA
Did this guy seriously just turn on his emergency lights a minute after hitting the kid?

Oh, and don't hurry your fat ass out there to see if the kid is still alive. Just slowly walk over there when you are ready and point a flashlight at him.
 
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
13,424
Likes
5,664
It's a sucky situation. I do not know if the cop was going to a call or not. If he was he should have at least had his lights on. Even so, having the emergency lights on would hot have saved the child. An inexperienced 11 year old child should not be riding a mini bike at night on a main road. But what is the difference if he was walking his bicycle across the street? None to me.

And what is the rule when police are repsponding to an emergency? Isn't there a speed limit of sorts? You can't fly down a road at 66 MPH when the posted speed is only 30, especially without your lights. Other drivers wouldn't even know you were going to a call and you would be a hazard to them as well. You can scoot along at 45 but 66 in my mind is excessive. And the light should have been on....
 
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
13,424
Likes
5,664
Did this guy seriously just turn on his emergency lights a minute after hitting the kid?

Oh, and don't hurry your fat ass out there to see if the kid is still alive. Just slowly walk over there when you are ready and point a flashlight at him.

truthfully, I would be pretty freaked out after a hit like that. that kid took the full brunt of the front end of that car at head height. I would be afraid to see what was left myself.
 

moojpg2

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
146
Likes
100
Child under the age of 16 should not have been riding a mini bike on a public four lane road with no helmet, no lights, etc. Parents are just as at fault, probably more so, than the cop. May have been a legit reason they were responding without lights/sirens, it is legal for police to exceed speed limit without them on in most states.

I will say, cop should have tried some basic first aid, checked pulse, etc. Probably wouldn't have helped after that kind of trauma, but I know I still would have tried until a paramedic got a chance to check him out.
 

bigben111435

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
282
Likes
87
I But what is the difference if he was walking his bicycle across the street? None to me.
I believe there is actually a big difference. He is a pedestrian if he is walking across the street with a bicycle.
As the situation appears, the boy was actually an unlicensed motorist operating an unauthorized vehicle on a public road way at night with no lights or reflectors.
Very important details.
Not absolving officer of blame.
The more I think about it, if this was an adult, and he were to have lived, he may have ended up in the defendants chair.
 

SKumar

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2017
Messages
3,010
Likes
3,208
Location
Middlesex
Lights and sirens would've alerted the boy that a fast car was oncoming. This piece of shit should be given the death sentence. Intentional negligence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KVX
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
13,424
Likes
5,664
I believe there is actually a big difference. He is a pedestrian if he is walking across the street with a bicycle.
As the situation appears, the boy was actually an unlicensed motorist operating an unauthorized vehicle on a public road way at night with no lights or reflectors.
Very important details.
Not absolving officer of blame.
The more I think about it, if this was an adult, and he were to have lived, he may have ended up in the defendants chair.

I understand the unlicensed and unauthorized vehicle aspect. still doesn't give him the right to mow the kid down. if the lights were eon maybe the kid scoots the other way.
But pedestrian or kid on a mini bike this guy didn't see him and would not have been able to stop in either situation.

has to be some negligence there on the side of the cop.

some rules had to have been broken. Cops shouldn't be allowed to go more than twice the speed limit on any road and certainly should not be responding to a call without the lights on at the very least. Turn them off when you get close but you have to let motorists and others know you are on an emergency call.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
2,608
Likes
1,865
Location
Worcester, MA
As far as the kid's contributory negligence, the questions are: 1) would the injuries be less severe and death avoided if the officer was traveling at the posted speed limit?
2) would the child likely have been alerted to the officer's car closing in if the emergency lights were on?

As far as officer's negligence goes: is the officer, even if responding to a call which requires no lights or siren, authorized to exceed the speed limit in a residential area?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cur
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
3,389
Likes
1,929
Location
nh
Kid crossed two lanes and never looked to see if they were clear. Actions like that get you hit at any speed.

I spent several months living in the Dominican Republic and saw more motorcycle/moped accidents in that time than the rest of my life. At any major intersection it was guaranteed someone would blow a red light well after it changed. They never looked either. Almost like what you don’t see can’t hurt you...
 
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
13,424
Likes
5,664
As far as the kid's contributory negligence, the questions are: 1) would the injuries be less severe and death avoided if the officer was traveling at the posted speed limit?
2) would the child likely have been alerted to the officer's car closing in if the emergency lights were on?

As far as officer's negligence goes: is the officer, even if responding to a call which requires no lights or siren, authorized to exceed the speed limit in a residential area?

I think if cops are responding to calls without lights or sirens they should be allowed to exceed the posted speed limit. But, there has to be limit to how fast they can go on certain roads. 2x the speed limit is reckless even with lights and siren. In either case the cop/driver that is speeding should have a heightened sense of awareness and use extra caution when traveling at higher speeds.

And killing someone on your way to save someone is counter-productive. In addition to that the cop in the accident will never make it to the original call. So why risk killing someone and not making it to back up another officer or making your back up late to the original call where someone else is potentially already in danger.
 

mibro

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
12,015
Likes
8,619
Location
Mass.
Lights and sirens would've alerted the boy that a fast car was oncoming.
This.

The accident took place at dusk when visibility is arguably the worst.

At 66 mph a vehicle travels about 100 yards in three seconds. Three seconds before the collision the Deputy's vehicle was 100 yards away from the victim showing only as two small headlights which may have been essentially invisible.

The victim had undoubtedly looked behind him, did not see any traffic coming up behind him and was waiting for the oncoming car to pass before he crossed.

If the Deputy had been driving the speed limit the accident would not have occurred because the Deputy's vehicle would have been 50 yards away from the boy when he crossed.

If the Deputy had been using his lights the accident would not have occurred because the boy would have seen the Deputy's vehicle and stayed put.
 
Last edited:

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
13,677
Likes
7,282
Lights and sirens would've alerted the boy that a fast car was oncoming. This piece of shit should be given the death sentence. Intentional negligence.
Courts should extend the option of carrying out the death penalty to the parents of slain kid against the POS in cases like this.....the means of execution should be left up to any parent that accepts......

When there are no consequences to criminal/immoral actions its no surprise that they continue......
 
  • Like
Reactions: KVX

Twigg

NES Member
Rating - 100%
71   0   0
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
13,076
Likes
2,431
Location
Live Free or Die !
This is exactly why personal liability needs to be written into law and enforced by law to reel in and stop reckless behavior by police.

Don't like it? Let's see how you live in a wheelchair like I do now!
 

mac1911

NES Member
Rating - 100%
65   0   0
Joined
Dec 26, 2008
Messages
26,566
Likes
3,968
I don't know man. It sucks. The cop should face something....
I have an 11 year old.
He wouldn't be driving on a minibike, at dusk, on what looks like a super busy main road. On top of it he has no helmet.
Not defending the cop, but that probably would have happened if the guy was doing 45, let alone 66.
Police should face the same charges as anyone else.
99% of the rest of us would have to at least face a day in court.
It all sucks,
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
14,753
Likes
7,454
Location
Southern NH
Rule: Police are allowed to exceed the speed limit when responding to emergencies.

Result: Police exceed the speed limit with recklessness and complete disregard for everyone else’s safety.


Of course there’s also the rule that when not following traffic rules while responding to emergencies that lights and sirens must be used, but why bother, right?


of this section.
(3) The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may do any of the following:
(a) Park or stand, irrespective of this act.
(b) Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation.
(c) Exceed the prima facie speed limits so long as he or she does not endanger life or property.
(d) Disregard regulations governing direction of movement or turning in a specified direction.
(4) The exemptions granted in this section to an authorized emergency vehicle apply only when the driver of the vehicle while in motion sounds an audible signal by bell, siren, air horn, or exhaust whistle as may be reasonably necessary, except as provided in subsection (5)and when the vehicle is equipped with at least 1 lighted lamp displaying a flashing, oscillating, or rotating red or blue light visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of 500 feet in a 360 degree arc unless it is not advisable to equip a police vehicle operating as an authorized emergency vehicle with a flashing, oscillating or rotating light visible in a 360 degree arc. In those cases, a police vehicle shall display a flashing, oscillating, or rotating red or blue light visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of 500 feet to the front of the vehicle. Only police vehicles that are publicly owned shall be equipped with a flashing, oscillating, or rotating blue light that when activated is visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of 500 feet in a 360 degree arc.

(5) A police vehicle shall retain the exemptions granted in this section to an authorized emergency vehicle without sounding an audible signal if the police vehicle is engaged in an emergency run in which silence is required.
 
Last edited:

jhagberg88

NES Member
Rating - 100%
38   0   1
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
925
Likes
211
The accident looks to be on both of them, but did he really just shine a light on the kid and not even look for a pulse or try and revive him?
 

meh

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
803
Likes
604
Location
Massachusetts
Police should face the same charges as anyone else.
99% of the rest of us would have to at least face a day in court.
You're probably right, but if this is about what should happen, I'm going to say that nobody should be charged in a case like that. The "but for" condition on the officer's errors is impossible to prove because getting hit at 30-35 mph in that situation is quite probably just as fatal, and the kid wasn't even looking when he was hit. And as for civil liability, it's shared culpability between both parties. I don't think the courts can do anything for the cause of justice in this case.

The accident looks to be on both of them, but did he really just shine a light on the kid and not even look for a pulse or try and revive him?
The bystander who did stoop to check, or whatever, spent all of 3 seconds doing it. I'm guessing the medical situation was clear at a glance.
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
13,677
Likes
7,282
This is exactly why personal liability needs to be written into law and enforced by law to reel in and stop reckless behavior by police.

Don't like it? Let's see how you live in a wheelchair like I do now!
I would take that a step further.......where the law is reckless/excessive/prone to abuse the sponsors of the original leg and legislators that voted in favor of it should be held personally accountable/criminally liable
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
13,677
Likes
7,282
I would take that a step further.......where the law is reckless/excessive/prone to abuse the sponsors of the original leg and legislators that voted in favor of it should be held personally accountable/criminally liable



The bystander who did stoop to check, or whatever, spent all of 3 seconds doing it. I'm guessing the medical situation was clear at a glance.

There's a world of difference between force of impact at 25/30 vs 60+ mph

That doesnt even factor in reaction times/opportunities that evaporate at higher speeds
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 15, 2018
Messages
1,479
Likes
794
Is it the kids fault he wasn't paying attention or wasn't able to see the car? Sure, but you can't excuse a law officer who's driving 66 in a 30 with no lights/sirens. 30 is slow, we all know that, most of us are probably closer to 40, but none of us are doing 66.

We saw a year or two ago a Connecticut State Trooper rear end a semi going 90 and he died.

Police need to slow down. All these speed cameras they're putting up outside schools and children aren't dying from people doing 35 in a 20, they're dying from cops driving too fast.
 
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
14,753
Likes
7,454
Location
Southern NH
I cited the law. He broke it. It’s black and white.

When responding to an emergency, he may:

Exceed the prima facie speed limits so long as he or she does not endanger life or property.

Well he hit and killed someone which is pretty good prima facie evidence itself that he endangered life.


The exemptions granted in this section to an authorized emergency vehicle apply only when the driver of the vehicle while in motion sounds an audible signal by bell, siren, air horn, or exhaust whistle as may be reasonably necessary, except as provided in subsection (5) and when the vehicle is equipped with at least 1 lighted lamp displaying a flashing, oscillating, or rotating red or blue light.
 
Last edited:

meh

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
803
Likes
604
Location
Massachusetts
So you're arguing that they should give him a speeding ticket? If so, I agree. You've made your case for it. But I thought you were complaining that he hadn't been brought up on charges for reckless driving, a charge which requires that you prove "willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property". That is a pretty vague law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom