| Motoring Discussion > fireman in court | Miscellaneous |
| Thread Author: zookeeper | Replies: 57 |
|
New Tue 13 Apr 10 19:43
fireman in court - zookeeper
|
|
seems the fireman maybe to blame for using his sirens....what next, will they have to do a risk assesment now when on their way to an incident? news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/8617685.stm |
|
New Tue 13 Apr 10 20:24
fireman in court - Skoda
|
|
I don't know for sure, but i'd hope they'd need to prove intent on the fireman's part. If he was found guilty of intent then he'd be punished fair and square, but it's hard to imagine someone putting on a siren for a laugh or just to scare some cows. If it's not required to prove intent and it's a negligence thing, then that's a slippery slope into a dark tunnel. Last edited by: CraigP on Tue 13 Apr 10 at 20:25
|
|
New Tue 13 Apr 10 20:33
fireman in court - MD
|
| The true meaning of PC World. |
|
New Wed 14 Apr 10 19:22
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
He would have been aware that using sirens near horses or other large livestock is a no no. We are instructed to look out on shouts to prevent "scaring" such animals. The article does not say whether he was on a shout or using the siren for a bit of fun to see the reaction of the livestock. In any case it should not have been used, unless it was used by mistake or he was unable to see the livestock involved. |
|
New Thu 15 Apr 10 13:05
fireman in court - FotheringtonTomas
|
|
>> He would have been aware that using sirens near horses or other large livestock is >> a no no. Quite right, it's dangerous. >> We are instructed to look out on shouts to prevent "scaring" such animals. The article >> does not say whether he was on a shout or using the siren for a >> bit of fun to see the reaction of the livestock. Various reports have more detail, e.g.: bit.ly/boViVB "Mr Lee was moving a herd of 100 dairy cows from a field towards their milking parlour at Robins Farm, when the fire engine allegedly approached from the opposite direction on a 999 call. It is claimed that the fire engine blasted its siren, spooking the animals and causing them to stampede in the opposite direction over Mr Lee. He was airlifted to Royal United Hospital in Bath, with serious head and chest injuries, before being transferred to Frenchay Hospital in Bristol where he died six days later. " (Western Daily Press) >> In any case it should >> not have been used unless it was used by mistake or he was unable to >> see the livestock involved. I'm unsure how the sirens operate, but "mistake" may not alter the case, & I hope anyone from an elevated position would be able to see 100 cows in the road! Last edited by: FotheringtonTomas on Thu 15 Apr 10 at 13:06
|
|
New Thu 15 Apr 10 13:26
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
Thanks for the further info. Siren operated via a button on the dash by hand or a button on the floor by foot. Don't know which system they use in this Brigade. As you say, has elevated position and definiately shouldn't of used siren to disperse herd. Either stupid, inexperienced or foolish. |
|
New Thu 15 Apr 10 14:15
fireman in court - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Either stupid inexperienced >> or foolish. Prosecution view must be that he could and should have foreseen the consequences so either failed to act or ignored risk. Hence the manslaughter charge. |
|
New Thu 15 Apr 10 14:28
fireman in court - Jacks
|
|
>> . As you say >> has elevated position and definiately shouldn't of used siren to disperse herd. Either stupid inexperienced >> or foolish. >> what is the proceedure then? I imagine they were on their way to an emergency - what if there were persons reported inside a burning building, we all know how long it can take for a herd to move along the road etc I'm not being "funny" - I'm genuinly curious to understand how you proceed safely but quickly in such cases. thanks J |
|
New Thu 15 Apr 10 15:25
fireman in court - FotheringtonTomas
|
|
>> I imagine they were on their way to an emergency - what if there were >> persons reported inside a burning building What if there were - hm - balance this against the risk of killing someone en route to the scene - by crashing the fire engine into something, running someone over, going through a red light without taking due care, or stampeding 100 cows along a lane... it's no good saving one person if you kill someone else. >> I'm not being "funny" - I'm genuinly curious to understand how you proceed safely but >> quickly in such cases. Stop, leaving as much room as possible on one side. Switch off engine, lights. Try and not frighten animals, who're already having to cope with the prescence of a great big shiny red thing in their surroundings. Wait until cattle have passed. Assist if possible. Re-start and go on. Last edited by: Webmaster on Mon 19 Apr 10 at 01:12
|
|
New Thu 15 Apr 10 17:27
fireman in court - FotheringtonTomas
|
| Wow. I didn't realise that b*5 was a prohibited word! |
|
New Thu 15 Apr 10 16:34
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
Should have local knowledge of stations ground. If in an area not familiar, he should have prempted the fact they were on a farm road, single track or watched out for warning signage or the farm itself. The high level of the cab would have given a good view over hedges or walls. One of the factors of being a good firefighter is observation. Planning on route and using contingencies for the unexpected.As said above, lights off, sirens off then back on after passing herd. It may delay a few minutes, but at least the appliance will make it to the call and nobody would get hurt. No point in stretching the envelope to get to an emergency. We need the appliance and crew to arrive in one piece and not have to stop to deal with another "self inflicted" incident. This pulls resources away from other parts and reduces the attendance at the primary incident. Whenever we get a persons reported call, the crew does get adrenaline fuelled as it's what the job is all about. The crew prepare for the worst the driver might tend to push the truck to its limit. Sometimes it goes horribly wrong and all the points above lead to people suffering as a result. Sometimes you get there and there isn't anyone involved, and you thank your stars that nothing happened on the way. Or you are tipped out for a false alarm or something apparently serious. Only to get there and find out it's nothing. Yet you have to treat each call the same way. And it can lead to tragedy. As on this occasion. I don't know the incident he was on, but the errors which led to this poor farmers death are a catalogue of events that with hindsight could have been reduced or elliminated IMHO and experience. Last edited by: Cpt. Flack on Thu 15 Apr 10 at 16:36
|
|
New Fri 16 Apr 10 09:41
fireman in court - Woodster
|
|
''Whenever we get a persons reported call, the crew does get adrenaline fuelled as it's what the job is all about. The crew prepare for the worst the driver might tend to push the truck to its limit. Sometimes it goes horribly wrong and all the points above lead to people suffering as a result. Sometimes you get there and there isn't anyone involved, and you thank your stars that nothing happened on the way. Or you are tipped out for a false alarm or something apparently serious. Only to get there and find out it's nothing. Yet you have to treat each call the same way. And it can lead to tragedy. As on this occasion. I don't know the incident he was on, but the errors which led to this poor farmers death are a catalogue of events that with hindsight could have been reduced or elliminated IMHO and experience. Would it be alright for the other emergency services to use these excuses? |
|
New Fri 16 Apr 10 18:10
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
What excuses. I'm not excusing his action, in fact I support the farmer and cannot condone the actions of this firefighter. Can't you tell from my post, or is it too long. I'm just giving a little insight as someone earlier asked this: "I imagine they were on their way to an emergency - what if there were persons reported inside a burning building, we all know how long it can take for a herd to move along the road etc I'm not being "funny" - I'm genuinly curious to understand how you proceed safely but quickly in such cases." Just an insight as you might want to know like some others on here instead of making judgements without knowing the facts. |
|
New Fri 16 Apr 10 18:33
fireman in court - Iffy
|
|
...Would it be alright for the other emergency services to use these excuses?... It's not even a real emergency and Pc Plod is already having a go at Fireman Sam. Petty rivalry and back biting among the three nines services will be the death of someone - it probably already has been. |
|
New Fri 16 Apr 10 21:38
fireman in court - Woodster
|
|
Ifithelps: I'm not a PC. But I do know that the Police service have a graded response system, since not all calls warrant the same response. Does the fire service use such a system? Petty rivalry between the services doesn't exist - all three do different jobs with crossover at some incidents. But none threatens the other. It won't be the death of anyone, an individuals actions already have been the death of someone, without any supposed 'petty rivalry'. And if it's not a real emergency, why the sirens?? Cpt. Flack: No, your post isn't too long, I hope you can understand my responses to yours. I'll answer each of your points in turn: ''the crew does get adrenaline fuelled, it's what the job's all about'' How about preparing for the incident according to the information received, but maintaining an open mind and seeing what's actually there when you get there? It prevents adrenaline taking over and allows a reasoned response at the scene. ''The driver might tend to push the truck to its limits'' Why? Where's the margin for error? If it goes horribly wrong and people suffer - as you suggest - is that acceptable? On account of what? The fact that an emergency was being responded to? ''and you thank your stars that nothing happened on the way'' Hopefully all fire crews aren't trusting to luck and some drivers use judgement. That you get there safely shouldn't be down to luck, it should be down to skill, training and appropriate assessment of the road. ''You get there to find it's nothing'' hence my point about maintaining an open mind. Proof that the information given by a caller isn't always correct. Hoax calls anyone? ''You have to treat each call the same way'' No, you don't. You assess the info, make an assessment and respond accordingly. ''And it can lead to tragedy'' Can this be justified? ''I don't know the incident he was on, but the errors which led to this poor farmers death are a catalogue of events that with hindsight could have been reduced or elliminated IMHO and experience.'' You can't reduce or eliminate this farmer's death. Hindsight won't bring him back. Foresight might have prevented it. Everybody in this particular discussion is guessing as to the circumstances. What about the following guesswork: The road was blocked by the farmer and his animals. the driver was impatient and thought the farmer wasn't doing enough to hurry the animals along, so he blasted his siren? One thing is for sure - the CPS wouldn't be prosecuting for manslaughter without some evidence. Personally I doubt that there isn't a little more to this than simply being on a call and failing to see the herd and farmer. there wouldn't be the evidence in such a scenario to prosecute. There's also an old maxim applicable to the emergency services, and probably all of us : ''Drive to arrive''. |
|
New Fri 16 Apr 10 22:59
fireman in court - Iffy
|
|
...Petty rivalry between the services doesn't exist... Woodster, It does - I have seen it with my own eyes. Not every member of the services indulge in it, but it does happen. And I think you know that. |
|
New Sat 17 Apr 10 01:01
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
"And if it's not a real emergency, why the sirens??" What was the call? "How about preparing for the incident according to the information received, but maintaining an open mind" Yes we do. But if the call comes in and there is the possibility of rescues or losing ones life, I'm sure your adrenaline would rush. It's a scientific fact, no matter what the call is. "Why? Where's the margin for error?" Training and knowledge aligned with help from the public reduces the risk. On a persons reported incident, seconds count and using the equipment to the limit of its capability is sometimes essential. But accidents do happen. "If it goes horribly wrong and people suffer - as you suggest - is that acceptable? On account of what? The fact that an emergency was being responded to?" Yes. Terrible things do happen due to unforeseen circumstances. I've had pedestrians wander out in our path and miss by inches. Cars pulling out of turnings knowing full well they have seen us, or not pulling over to let us pass. Not only us, but the police and ambulance service as well. "and you thank your stars that nothing happened on the way'' Again I'm talking about unforseen circumstances. Yes, skill and a professional attitude aligned with training will minimise the risk to crew and public. "hence my point about maintaining an open mind. Proof that the information given by a caller isn't always correct. Hoax calls anyone?" Hoax calls are filtered out. So abandoned calls, which are traced, are treated as normal fire calls. You still have to prepare on route for a genuine call and all the procedural knowledge that goes with it. On arrival any plan will be re-evaluated to suit the circumstances. We don't carry crystal balls. "Can this be justified?" In this particular case, no. I think I have stated my opinion on that. "Foresight might have prevented it." Agree. "What about the following guesswork: The road was blocked by the farmer and his animals. the driver was impatient and thought the farmer wasn't doing enough to hurry the animals along, so he blasted his siren?" If that was the case, then it was wrong. As I have said there would have been local knowledge, planning en route and correct use of siren with livestock and public about. If you read the gist of my original post I agree that for the CPS to be prosecuting there cannot be "smoke" without "fire", and I am not defending any actions that allegedly led to this guys death. Majority of crews in all the emergency services respond to incidents in a professional, safe and skillful manner. Incidents like this do occur but on a relatively few occasions compared to the hundreds of thousands of calls responded to by all three services each year. |
|
New Sun 18 Apr 10 18:43
fireman in court - Fullchat
|
|
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Inquest in Sheffield which has just concluded involving a fire appliance on a 'shout'. Have tried to link to Yorkshire Post but it does not seem to be happening. Appliance negotiates red lights and collides with emerging Subaru resulting in the death of female driver. Debate as to whether siren was on at the relevant time. Driver, as is his right, refused to answer questions. Crew state they were not paying attention and were otherwise engaged and unable to corroborate or deny use of siren. Independent witnesses cannot recall hearing a siren. Investigation states minimum speed in excess of 18MPH which is in excess of recommend speed to negotiate a red light. Damned if the do and damned if they don't! Hoax call. The 'joker' subsequently traced. And If I was driving I'd expect my crew to be looking out for me as well :-S Last edited by: Fullchat on Sun 18 Apr 10 at 18:43
|
|
New Sun 18 Apr 10 19:12
fireman in court - Westpig
|
|
Makes a change for the Fire Service to be in the spot light...not that i'd wish it on them. In the 'other place' it was virtually a monthly event for a thread to kick someone when they were down, when it had all gone horribly wrong on an emergency call. That sort of thing can never be achieved with zero risks, not that the armchair lawyers won't argue for it....safe and sound in their...armchairs. |
|
New Sun 18 Apr 10 22:04
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
"In the 'other place' it was virtually a monthly event for a thread to kick someone when they were down, when it had all gone horribly wrong on an emergency call." Yes usually aimed at you two MLC/WP. Good to see you both on here. Yet again as you say, the usual armchair critic. |
|
New Sun 18 Apr 10 22:25
fireman in court - Zero
|
|
>> In the 'other place' it was virtually a monthly event for a thread to kick >> someone when they were down when it had all gone horribly wrong on an emergency >> call. The problem is, that there is no allowance for "accidents" by civilians. Blame *has* to be established by those with warrants to do so, and sentence passed by those in authority at the behest of those in power. Alas the same rules are applied to those with warrants. (tho unfourtunately not always by those in authority or power) |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 17:39
fireman in court - Westpig
|
|
Valid point Zero...but...the average motorist does not drive through red lights, the wrong side of bollards and speed excessively...all of which an emergency services driver is expected to do as part of their job. If you push the envelope, with anything in life...then sooner or later you'll come unstuck, particularly when you add in to the mix other people who are: drink/drugged/daft. Some emergency service drivers have requested an emergency services licence..so that any mishaps can be recorded on that one, not their own one, which let's face it would affect their own private motoring lives if they're own licence cops a shed load of points....(this'll never happen through the fear they won't care and the standards will drop). Personally i'd like to see better more prolonged training (rather than the constant cutting back), more check tests and yearly remedial training rather than a one off 'pass'. |
|
New Sun 18 Apr 10 22:09
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
"And If I was driving I'd expect my crew to be looking out for me as well :-S" Agree totally. As OIC in the front I would be a second pair of eyes and operating the siren. Guys in the outside seats by the windows and extra set. Can't imagine approaching traffic signals without lights and sirens. Though the silence from the driver and the crew is a bit ominous. Last edited by: Cpt. Flack on Sun 18 Apr 10 at 22:10
|
|
New Sun 18 Apr 10 22:55
fireman in court - Ted
|
|
Our main road is usually very busy most of the day and often virtually gridlocked. Both main roads at our traffic lights are routes for emergency vehicles of all three services. mostly ambulances. I've driven under ' lights and music ' many times in a previous existance and I find now, it's very difficult in heavy traffic to pinpoint where the sound is coming from. It's not easy to move out of the way and it seems now that if you move across a red light, however carefully, you will get caught out, if there's a camera, and fined. No excuses, no leeway given. Advice from the police here is, stay where you are, the driver will get by. I see situations here where that's just not possible. I remember, years ago, waiting at a red light on the A6 in Salford in my service van. It was fairly late at night. A very small car with a full compliment of passengers came out, on green, from my left just as a fire engine overtook me at quite a high speed and jumped the red. How he missed the little car I'll never know. He just had the blue lights on. Ted |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 16:23
fireman in court - Woodster
|
|
Cpt. Flack: I'm definitely no armchair critic. (I guess you're referring to me) All i said is: 'I'm not a P.C.' I shouldn't have to state my employment, qualifications or pertinent experience to give opinion. as for making judgements without knowing the facts -I didn't. I asked you questions and made a few statements. I then suggested a possible scenario that might lead to prosecution. Do you have the full facts? perhaps you'd be kind enough to share them and put an end to the thread. I'm entitled to my view and I stand by a graded response system and driving within the limits of a vehicle. I'd be amazed if Midlife and Westpig don't agree. You're entitled to your views and the rest of the respondents on here are entitled to view our discussion, and my views about emergency response. So, does the fire service use a graded response system? You didn't answer that one, I'd be interested to know. If they don't, why not? |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 18:38
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
You're being a bit agressive in your post. Did I refer to you by name? WP and MLC both have come under fire from armchair critics in the past, and I was empathising with THEM. If you took it the wrong way then obviously you consider yourself one of the same. If you call it grading, some shouts are undertaken off the bell. Some have a reduced attendance, one truck, but still on blues and twos and some have a special attendance of specialist trucks or extra pumps to augment for a larger risk. |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 16:44
fireman in court - Fullchat
|
|
Interesting legal point has emerged. Particularly in the case of Fire Appliances I believe the front seat passenger (OIC) operates the warning equipment and operates the radio. The driver does the driving. So if the Appliance either used or did not use the sirens as appropriate who is going to suffer the consequences? Certainly in the case of the Sheffield Inquest the fingers appeared to be pointing at the driver. If you look at the potential for an offence of 'Aid and Abet' - Death By, Dangerous or Careless Driving or other charge which hinges around the use or non use of sirens then if the driver is not responsible for that equipment there is no primary offence to 'Aid and Abet' and the operator has to be involved to some degree in the propulsion or steering so cannot be deemed to be 'Driving' and commit the primary offence. Interesting! |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 17:30
fireman in court - Westpig
|
|
>> If you look at the potential for an offence of 'Aid and Abet' - Death >> By Dangerous or Careless Driving or other charge which hinges around the use or non use of sirens then if the driver is not responsible for that equipment there is >> no primary offence to 'Aid and Abet' and the operator has to be involved to >> some degree in the propulsion or steering so cannot be deemed to be 'Driving' and >> commit the primary offence. Interesting! >> Very. What a minefield that would be. Tenner says it'll come down to the driver though, Captain of the ship and all that. |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 18:28
fireman in court - Woodster
|
| That had occurred to me too but I thought it too complicated a point for some. Anyway, still a difficult point - aid and abet = actively assist, encourage, counsel or procure. Difficult to prove liability for that operator so I think responsibility would fall back to the driver. perhaps... |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 18:43
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
| No. As I've already said, the OIC is responsible for operating the sirens. Unless he/she is engaged in navigating the driver via a map, getting rigged in firegear or using radio equipment, then they are left on permanently or switched off. The button on our trucks in London are either in the footwell of the n/s front seat or on the n/s of the dash. The driver has enough to concentrate on without having to worry about the siren. |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 19:01
fireman in court - Woodster
|
| But the point is about the drivers liabilities. If, God forbid, a pedestrian is run over and seriously injured, use of the sirens as warning equipment will be in issue (probably). The driver won't be able to defer that responsibility to another person in the cab. Failure to use them appropriately will fall to him/her. This may well be something that the service should consider taking legal advice on. Even then, it'll only be advice until the courts offer guidance through a stated case. I certainly wouldn't want to be that driver, on trial, having relied on someone else to operate the sirens who let me down. |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 19:18
fireman in court - Zero
|
|
I would assume, in motion and on the way to a shout, the driver is in charge of the appliance. Ultimately while in motion, all the decisions are made by him. Unless someone steps up to the plate and says "I pressed the twotones - the driver didnt tell me" the driver will take the collar. It seems however the crew are all playing the "looking elsewhere" card. As you would. |
|
New Thu 22 Apr 10 13:09
fireman in court - IJWS14
|
| Regardless of whether the driver had control of the siren or not he was the one who chose to pull out rather than slow down and take a little more time to cross the junction safely. |
|
New Mon 19 Apr 10 23:36
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
| The sirens are there to assist the driver in his/her duty of driving the truck to an incident warning the public that we are on our way to you and to help our passage there. If they hit another vehicle, injure or kill they are open to prosecution as any member of the public or other emergency services. Contributing factors would need to be taken into account. |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 00:00
fireman in court - Fullchat
|
|
Indeed, but the driver is responsible for the safe passage of the vehicle and enjoys certain exemptions (with conditions) in order that they can do so. It follows therefore that they should have control of emergency equipment to aide them as they have ultimate responsibility under the Road Traffic Act for the vehicle. Response drivers will tell you that to 'kill the music' where appropriate and change the tone occasionally has a positive impact on passage. If you use the comparison of Police vehicles; which I appreciate are a different animal, they can and are used in single crew mode. I assume Ambulances are the same. Yes its a luxury if your crew mate will take some of the pressure off you but I would not let someone who was not of equal qualification and skill level operate the sirens without close supervision, which defeats the object of the exercise somewhat. I certainly wouldn't want them fastening their bootlaces whilst we were on an emergency call ;-O |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 08:32
fireman in court - Cpt. Flack
|
|
" I would not let someone who was not of equal qualification and skill level operate the sirens without close supervision" In my case, I am a qualified motor driver (MD). So I can read the road as my drivers see it. This is where experience comes in. There are OICs who are not drivers and it shows. The policy in London is that ALL new entrants are trained as MDs. Admittedly, some better than others. 90% of the time the boot laces are on before we actually move off :-) |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 13:12
fireman in court - FotheringtonTomas
|
|
>> Everybody in this particular discussion is guessing as to the circumstances. No, they are not. |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 16:58
fireman in court - Woodster
|
| It's like a childs game now. Ooh, go on then, tell me, pleeeease... |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 17:40
fireman in court - Iffy
|
|
...It's like a childs game now... Woodster Minor, You are using 'childs' in the possessive form, so it takes an apostrophe before the s - child's. Go to the bottom of the class. |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 18:02
fireman in court - Woodster
|
|
Sigh. I'm gonna be a teenager now: 'Whatever.'. tee hee. There's a sign near me at the entrance to a smallholding that reads: 'Egg for sale.' Faberge, one wonders? Saw another one on holiday last year: 'Cattery'. A fair start, but then underneath: 'home for cats'. Well, cleared that one up for me... |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 19:05
fireman in court - CGNorwich
|
| My favourite on the A11 is "Dogs Trust Rehoming Centre" Nice to see an endorsement of the place by our canine friends |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 19:47
fireman in court - Bromptonaut
|
| Ahhh, "gentlemen raise the seat" and "electric trains stop here". |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 21:10
fireman in court - Ted
|
|
Remember when greengrocers used to advertise their goods by painting the price on the window in white ? I saw one , who'd done it from the inside, advertising Rhudarb. Ted |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 20:04
fireman in court - FotheringtonTomas
|
| If you are going to make stupid and insulting generalisations, you should be prepared to back them up, rather than so obviously compound your errors. I have made no guesses in this thread, and perhaps there are others who have not. |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 21:10
fireman in court - Woodster
|
|
OK, fair point. But from the opening few threads there is the suggestion that a risk assessment may be needed and then questions raised about how the fireman is to achieve his objectives - how to balance risks on the road v. risks at the scene of the incident he is attending. Whilst this in itself is a valid discussion, with your obvious common sense answer, I took issue with some of the respondents. I would hope it's clear that I agree wholeheartedly with one of your earlier posts. If the emergency service driver has to wait, then so be it. We don't know the specifics of this case, and the initial news report does nothing to enlighten us, so we can only guess exactly what the prosecution is based on. I hope that someone will follow the case and enlighten us but I'll wager now that it was something similar to the scenario suggested by me, and not simply the fire officer failing to see cows in a field nearby-there'd be no basis for a manslaughter case. We've seen much conjecture on this and another similar website about various prosecutions, with much opinion. All too frequently that opinion is not based on facts about the specific case in question. But you're right - few opinions in this thread, perhaps I should have said that we can only guess, or I can only guess, about this case. |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 21:39
fireman in court - Cliff Pope
|
|
Apart from any questions of more serious culpability, surely the basic point is that the siren only serves a purpose if it attracts someone's attention who is then in a position to move out of the way? Sounding the siren at a herd of cows or in a dense traffic gridlock is as pointless as sounding it at a brick wall. |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 22:00
fireman in court - Ted
|
|
Not altogether, the use of the siren also indicates to anyone awaiting the attendance of an emergency vehicle that it's nearly there. Might just stop someone throwing a couple of kids from a first floor window. Gives much needed reassurance to those in a crisis position. Ted |
|
New Tue 20 Apr 10 22:15
fireman in court - Zero
|
|
>> >> Not altogether the use of the siren also indicates to anyone awaiting the attendance of >> an emergency vehicle that it's nearly there. >> Might just stop someone throwing a couple of kids from a first floor window. >> Gives much needed reassurance to those in a crisis position. Alas had they thrown the kids out when this horn was sounded they would have been trampled by the cows. |
|
New Wed 21 Apr 10 08:27
fireman in court - Cliff Pope
|
|
Thread drift - this lovely line from Groucho Marx comes to mind: "I could dance with you till the cows come home. Or on second thoughts, I'd rather dance with the cows and you come home" |
|
New Wed 21 Apr 10 14:33
fireman in court - Westpig
|
|
>> Sounding the siren at a herd of cows or in a dense traffic gridlock is >> as pointless as sounding it at a brick wall. >> Perfectly correct in theory, mostly correct in practice...but...it's amazing how many people see the lights and hear the noise get turned off....and then think "ah well that's alright then, back to normal, brain in neutral, mind elsewhere"...not.. "they're obviously being patient as there's gridlock (or whatever), but i'll need to get a move on afterwards". Emergency service drivers are taught not to unnecessarily leave warning equipment on...because it stresses and hassles the public....and then they'll make even worse decisions. |
|
New Thu 22 Apr 10 21:02
fireman in court - MD
|
|
Ambulance collected me from home last evening. Saw him coming too and for the last 1.5 mls blue top and intermittent headlights only. MD |
|
New Fri 23 Apr 10 16:17
fireman in court - BobbyG
|
| Hope all OK now Martin? |
|
New Fri 23 Apr 10 15:26
fireman in court - Westpig
|
|
>> Emergency service drivers are taught not to unnecessarily leave warning equipment on...because it stresses and >> hassles the public....and then they'll make even worse decisions. >> I need to clarify the above. It should include 'when they are temporarily baulked'. In other words nowadays turning off the sirens etc is considered a 'no-no' in the middle of your call, even if common sense can dictate you should e.g. Martin's example..or.. you are getting near to your destination and don't want to give the burglar too much warning. It's more and more the case of 'hang the driver' if it all goes wrong...and you still get the memos about not making too much noise at night. How the hell do you keep the noise on, on all calls, for safety reasons AND be mindful of people sleeping? Damned if you do and damned if you don't..as usual. |
|
New Fri 23 Apr 10 20:05
fireman in court - MD
|
|
All Coppers and I mean all should resign, put the crap up the country, re-group and get back to real policing. This Country needs a HUGE wake up call re the dross that pervades our lives. Take them out of the frame by whatever means it takes and if that means locking them up in fenced off fields with limited facilities and basic food and latrines then so be it cos I for one am sick to death of supporting scum. Grrrr...............MD |
|
New Sat 24 Apr 10 12:50
fireman in court - Westpig
|
|
>> cos I for one am sick to death of supporting scum. >> So am I. Have a read of a book called 'Perverting the Course of Justice' by Inspector Gadget. Written on the quiet by a serving Police Inspector, somewhere rural. Some of it makes you laugh, most of it makes you want to weep. The bloke is telling the complete TRUTH. In some warped way, reading it did me good...because...it made me think 'Thank Christ it isn't just me that thinks like that or has to put up with this crap'. His tales of woe are virtually identical to a city cops lot, I can personally vouch for that. The whole system is totally knackered. |
|
New Sat 24 Apr 10 21:40
fireman in court - Fullchat
|
|
Ditto WP's sentiments. Just finished it a few weeks ago. Likewise 'Wasting Police Time,, written under the pseudonym of David Copperfield. Both bang on the money - so to speak.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sat 24 Apr 10 at 21:41
|
|
New Tue 14 Dec 10 17:53
fireman in court - R.P.
|
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-11990507 An outcome. |
|
New Tue 14 Dec 10 18:02
fireman in court - Iffy
|
|
Pleaded guilty to the reduced charge of death by careless, for which the maximum penalty is five years. Judge has already told him he's not going to prison: "The judge, Mr Justice Roderick Evans, adjourned the case until Monday, when Lawford will be sentenced. "He told the fireman he was not considering an immediate custodial sentence and released him on conditional bail." Reasonable result for Fireman Sam. |
Forum Version 3.0 - By Khoosys
Car4play Forum
