October 21. 2011
This may just be a legal term but he was booked for “investigation of failure to stop.” What is there to investigate? Isn’t he being booked for “failure to stop”? He isn’t being booked for an investigation, is he? This is why I hate lawyers.
Anyway, this story just bugs me. It is pretty funny on the face of it, but that quote by the Deputy Sheriff sits wrong with me. “He’d had a bad morning and wasn’t stopping for the cops. It was nothing more than that.”
I suppose he means that the driver wasn’t fleeing the scene of a crime, that there was no bank robbery in progress, no one got murdered, etc, and this is just no big deal.
Here is how I see it. A man has a bad morning, is in a bad mood, and speeds way over the limit. He ignores the police’s order to pull over, keeps going, and gets so angry that he calls the police department to tell them to leave him alone, and then his father to complain about the cops. He is not well thought out. So the angry and distraught driver is speeding and making calls on his cell phone and ignoring the police and this is no big deal?
Would Deputy Sheriff Rigby feel the same way if the driver plowed into his daughter’s car? This driver was distraught, distracted, and speeding. OK, I get that this is not a case for the Major Crimes Unit, but if I were driving on the road with that guy it would be a big deal to me. Take it a little more seriously, Wasatch County PD.
But there is on thing missing from the article.
Why isn’t this man undergoing psychiatric evaluation?
The question is Imponderable.
But maybe they are just more laid back in Utah.
And feel free to add your own “was he driving a white Bronco?” joke.
Mr. Blog's Tepid Ride 
A psychiatric evaluation is definitely needed. Who calls the cops to tell them not to chase them? Duh!
LikeLike
I can now reveal that this police chase was the inspiration for tomorrow’s Saturday Comics: OJ Simpson.
LikeLike
“Take it a little more seriously, Wasatch County PD”
Several years ago there was an accident here in Italy, a guy killed six (6!!) people by running them over while driving completely drunk. Was he jailed because he killed them? No, of course: he wasn’t able to think clearly because he was drunk, so he was innocent. Did it matter that BEFORE getting drunk he was able to think straight and perfectly knew what he was doing while starting to drink knowing he had to drive? No, of course. Free as a bird. Everybody is innocent today, nobody has any responsability whatsoever. Disgusting.
LikeLike
Wait a minute, that guy got off easy because he was drunk? That is utterly mad! Totally backwards and stupid.
LikeLike
Even worse: it’s criminal. Hopefully the laws have changed in recent years, but that almost made me decide for good I didn’t want to be part of humanity anymore.
LikeLike
In that accident, drunk driving was not a crime? And if so, how does that negate the accident? I don’t get it, it is all a part of the lack of personal responsibility that is rampant across the world.
LikeLike
It happened something like 15 years ago or something, so I don’t remember the details, but I believe he was fined and probably spent some ridiculously short amount of time in jail for driving drunk, but he was considered innocent of the murder (that’s what it was, from my point of view) because he wasn’t “able to intend and want,” as the Italian legal phrase goes, because he was drunk.
LikeLike
Murder here also requires intent but this is a clear case of manslaughter (like murder but without intent) and the driver would get a harsh sentence here.
LikeLike