20 miles over speed limit. Kill pedestrian in crosswalk. No charges.

[phill4paul]

CHERRYLAND -- A sheriff's deputy was driving almost 20 mph over the speed limit with no siren or emergency lights on last year when his cruiser struck two pedestrians, killing one and injuring the other, according to the California Highway Patrol.


The District Attorney's Office did not charge Hamm, a spokeswoman said.

"Based upon a very thorough review of all of the evidence, we declined to file charges," Teresa Drenick said. "Our standard is whether we believe we can prove that a crime occurred beyond a reasonable doubt."

http://www.insidebayarea.com/breaking-news/ci_25654605/alameda-county-deputy-was-speeding-when-he-hit?source=rss

[GunnyFreedom]

rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[GunnyFreedom]

//

[Mani]

He feared for his safety....Pedestrians are scary...when they walk...

[Mani]

"Based upon a very thorough review of all of the evidence, we declined to file charges," Teresa Drenick said. "Our standard is whether we believe we can prove that a crime occurred beyond a reasonable doubt."


Yes, we spent five minutes in a circle jerk and decided he never committed a crime. Now STFU before I run you over myself.



"This is a guy who admits to speeding regularly," the attorney said. "He's doing 53 in a 35, and he kills somebody, and you're not charging him? If it were me, I'd be in jail."


Well that's how the just-us system works now doesn't it...

[mrsat_98]

If you don't like the way cops drive stay out of the freakin crosswalk.

[Origanalist]

I'm sure if a strongly worded letter were sent it would stop police from being reckless menaces in the future.

[tod evans]

I'm sure if a strongly worded letter were sent it would stop police from being reckless menaces in the future.

In today's world a strongly worded letter that is either addressed to the wrong elite, or one that uses verboten verbiage may get the author a visit from the stromtroopers..:eek:

[Origanalist]

Unless it was somebody important like a congressman or even another cop, I don't see why they should file charges. Just collateral damage in the war to keep us safe and free.

[Thor]

Did they sue the pedestrians for damage to the vehicle?

[phill4paul]

Use the crosswalk and get run over. Jaywalk and get beat up. Damned if you do damned if you don't.

[CCTelander]

I'm shocked, shocked I say to discover tha a cop got away with this here in Amerika, the land of just-us and fee-dumb!

[limequat]

"Based upon a very thorough review of all of the evidence, we declined to file charges," Teresa Drenick said. "Our standard is whether we believe we can prove that a crime occurred beyond a reasonable doubt."

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that manslaughter wasn't a crime any more.

[Brian4Liberty]

I'll have to disagree with most of the sentiment on this one. Pedestrians that walk out in front of large, heavy, moving objects are more responsible in cases like this, doubly so at night. The laws of physics override all other laws.

From a related thread:


Saw a guy this afternoon walk out into the crosswalk on a busy street right in front of a moving vehicle. It happened to be a fire truck with it's lights and siren going. Fire truck was going slow enough to stop. Guy finally turned to see the truck after passing it. Best guess is that he was wearing earbuds cranked up to the max. A true deaf person would be far more aware. Lucky it wasn't a cop. He might have gotten shot for failure to respond to verbal commands.

Darwin Award contestants are everywhere.

On the other hand, the hypocrisy of the penalty for the driver in this case is glaring. If it was not a cop driving the car, the driver would have been put through the wringer, and probably charged with something and in jail right now. The Praetorian Guard is immune, as are their royal masters.

[Origanalist]

I'll have to disagree with most of the sentiment on this one. Pedestrians that walk out in front of large, heavy, moving objects are more responsible in cases like this, doubly so at night. The laws of physics override all other laws.

From a related thread:



On the other hand, the hypocrisy of the penalty for the driver in this case is glaring. If it was not a cop driving the car, the driver would have been put through the wringer, and probably charged with something and in jail right now. The Praetorian Guard is immune, as are their royal masters.

Ah, they brought it on themselves.

[Origanalist]

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site571/2014/0428/20140428_073707_DEPUTY%20crosswalk%20042914-01_500.jpg


Hamm was not on an emergency call but was driving north on Mission looking for two vehicles that had been in separate police chases shortly before the accident, according to the report. Traffic was light, the deputy told investigators.


"This is a guy who admits to speeding regularly," the attorney said. "He's doing 53 in a 35, and he kills somebody, and you're not charging him? If it were me, I'd be in jail."

[limequat]

So he couldn't see them well enough to avoid hitting them, but he could see the well enough to know they were not in the crosswalk?

Here's a general rule of thumb for the manners-impaired: Try not to run over pedestrians.

[Brian4Liberty]

Ah, they brought it on themselves.

You step out in front of a moving vehicle at night, you are taking a risk they won't see you.

Or are you saying that a law that states "pedestrians have the right of way" somehow invalidates the laws of physics and common sense?

[Brian4Liberty]

Here's a general rule of thumb for the manners-impaired: Try not to run over pedestrians.

Do you believe that he ran them over on purpose? Do you believe that other people run over pedestrians on purpose? As a percentage, how often do you think drivers run over pedestrians on purpose?

[Origanalist]

You step out in front of a moving vehicle at night, you are taking a risk they won't see you.

Or are you saying that a law that states "pedestrians have the right of way" somehow invalidates the laws of physics and common sense?

Not at all. The responsibility for avoiding car-pedestrian collisions belongs to both. And the pedestrian obviously pays the higher price for not paying attention. However, in this case I fail to see how they were " more responsible" than the cop speeding down the road not looking out for people. I see them doing this in front of my place and it's only a matter of time before they cream somebody.

And the fact they will pay no penalty only encourages them.

[Ender]

You step out in front of a moving vehicle at night, you are taking a risk they won't see you.

Or are you saying that a law that states "pedestrians have the right of way" somehow invalidates the laws of physics and common sense?

There's that little part about driving 20 miles over the speed limit.

And- if the cop, or anyone, was speeding, they have to be doubly aware of pedestrians.

[Ender]

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site571/2014/0428/20140428_073707_DEPUTY%20crosswalk%20042914-01_500.jpg

Right there proves the cop was probably lying.

If the two were jaywalking, they'd still be alive, because they'd be much more aware. More pedestrians are killed in crosswalks.

[Thor]

Do you believe that he ran them over on purpose? Do you believe that other people run over pedestrians on purpose? As a percentage, how often do you think drivers run over pedestrians on purpose?

Basically, he was looking for 2 other vehicles (not paying attention to the road probably, but looking left and right down other alleys/side streets/parking lots/etc - so he did not see them) and he was doing 53 mph in a 35 mph zone while "looking around", and he lied about it and said he was only going "around" 40 mph.


Deputy Jonathan Hamm was driving 53 mph in a 35 mph zone on Mission when his car struck Rosas and Delgadillo, according to the CHP investigation report. He told investigators he was driving around 40 mph and that he routinely drives about 5 mph over the speed limit.

And while pedestrians should obviously look out for their own safety, all vehicles, except emergency vehicles responding to an emergency (lights / sirens) are supposed to yield to people in crosswalks.

Question... since he was "looking for other vehicles", was he in "stealth mode"? ie. headlights off too? One would "assume" he had his headlights on, but maybe he didn't and that was another reason (in addition to being "drunk") why the pedestrians did not see him... And why was all the witness information redacted?


They went to Rosas' home on Blossom Way and later walked to Mission to find a taxi, the report said. Both were under the influence of intoxicants, police said, although the redacted CHP report has no specific blood-alcohol information.

La Taberna's owner said Rosas often stopped there on the weekends.

"He was very responsible person. He always called a taxi after having a couple of drinks," Maria Valencia said. The 38-year-old construction worker regularly sent money to his elderly mother and ailing sister in Mexico, she said.

This newspaper received the CHP report in response to a public records request. Key portions of it were blacked out, including a witness' statement, cause of the accident and recommendations.

So, to summarize... "We hit some drunk Mexican's... oh well. Nothing to see here. Move along."

My question is, with all the cameras around this Orwellian state, what does the video footage show?

[kcchiefs6465]

Isn't the first time.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlxmireP9f4

[limequat]

Do you believe that he ran them over on purpose? Do you believe that other people run over pedestrians on purpose? As a percentage, how often do you think drivers run over pedestrians on purpose?

No I don't think the cops ran them over on purpose. I also don't think it matters much if they were in the crosswalk or 3 feet outside the crosswalk. Manslaughter is manslaughter, it doesn't matter if the pedestrians were in the crosswalk or on the sidewalk.
Remember the speed kills campaign? I guess that doesn't apply to LEOs.