WHO TICKETS THE COPS?

Yesterday I was on I-96 outside of Lansing heading for Grand Rapids.  A woman passed me on the left and continued to pass other cars ahead of me.  She was going about the speed limit.  Then a state cop in a Michigan highway patrol car zoomed by me and pulled right up on the woman's tail.  Because she was still passing a line of vehicles, she had no safe way of moving over into the right lane.  Yet the cop continued to tailgate her.  Finally, she floored it, passed the last car, and shifted into the right lane.  The cop then zipped away at about 85-90 mph.

At no time did the cop have his flashers or siren on.  I soon learned why.  A few miles down the road, I saw the same cop in the median chatting with one his comrades in another patrol car.  It was apparent that they were setting up the spots where they would radar the oncoming evening rush hour.  Hardly an emergency.

Now why shouldn't I be disgusted with the conduct of this cop?  Had he observed me driving in the same reckless manner, he would have ticketed me -- and rightly so.  This cop flouting the law is only the half of it.  It was deadly dangerous for him to hang on that woman's bumper at 70-75 mph in heavy traffic.  For any number of reasons, she might have had to brake urgently, and WHAP! that cop would have plowed into the back of her car.  There was no excuse for the cop driving the way he did.  It was nothing more than the arrogance of man who thinks wearing a badge puts him above the law he is duty-bound to serve.

If this were an isolated instance, I would be making too much of a fuss.  The fact is that I usually see the state highway cops speeding and tailgating on the expressways without any indication that they are responding to an emergency.  Plainly they know there is no one who will be ticketing them for their reckless driving.

Comments

[Steve Smith]

Remember the scandal about two years ago involving Michigan State Police cadets driving recklessly on I-96? Despite the testimony of several credible witnesses, including Judge Sarah Smolenski, the state did nothing but publish results of a flimsy in-house investigation that found nothing wrong. I think this problem is deeply rooted in state trooper culture.
BTW, welcome back from vacation, Bill!

[Paul S.]

I live in the City of Grand Rapids and I have seen a number of times where GRPD would approach an intersection turn on the overhead lights and cross the intersection, after they are though the lights are turned off and they process down the road at their normal 5-10 MPH over the speed limit. Once I processed to follow one cruiser and of course I obeyed the speed limit after I found him in the parking lot of a gas station talking to a fellow officer. That was important!?!

[dogfisherman]

There are times when police officers must exceed the speed limit to suprise their suspect, absent lights and siren. However, I have witnessed state troopers do this for the sake of merely serving a speeding ticket. I was passed the other day by a trooper who was well in excess of 100mph. A bit much. Perhaps they need to read up on Michigan Public Act 300?

[Lyrical2520]

I used to be a police officer and understand that at times yes, they do have to travel at a higher rate of speed without their lights or sirens on, HOWEVER, not very often at all. The REAL reason they do it? When they turn on lights and sirens, big brother is watching! Their in car cameras AUTOMATICALLY begin recording their every move. I witnessed a state cop dangerously tailgating less then 2 weeks ago and tried in vain to get his vehicle number to call in a complaint. It's hard to respect the laws and the officers that uphold them when the officers themselves blatantly disregard the laws they are paid to enforce.

[Families United for Justice]

To everyone who has commented on this post about cops who break the same laws they are supposed to be enforcing,

There is a group of families in Grand Rapids that can assure all of you that state cops (as well as the county and city cops) are doing much more than violating speeding laws. They are also covering up the murders of our loved ones in nursing homes and hospitals, the mutilation of their corpses and the illegal harvesting of their organs by the corrupt Kent County Medical Examiner and his for-profit company. All of these actions clearly violate state and local laws, but yet, not one LEO will lift a finger to help us. We've even pleaded for help from the Chief of Police himself, and as usual, our requests for assistance fell on deaf ears. We all have more than enough evidence to back up everything we've said, too. Why would anyone in LE want to hurt our families like this? Our families will never give up in our search for the truth and for justice.

[The Executive Director]

Thanks for your comments, everyone -- especially the inside info some of you have shared.

Regards, Bill

[PIGGY]

Everyone likes to bitch and moan about a police officer then when some [deleted] is trying to break into to your house you call the police....ODD!!!! Quit bitchin sometimes we have to travel to domestic violence cases without lights so we are not ambushed, other times we are going to a silent alarm at a branch bank that is being robbed. I would like all of you to spend a day in our shoes to see what the world outside your cozy little suburbs is like! I am not in anyway saying breaking the law is right for a cop, dirty cops should be arrested, charged, and thrown in jail.

[Edited by the Editor to delete foul language.]

[The Executive Director]

Sorry, Piggy, but a state trooper on a country freeway doesn't need to keep his flashers off to not alert malefactors. By the way, I live in downtown G.R., not the 'burbs. Finally, if you are a cop, your screed hasn't done much credit for the thin blue line.

Regards,
Bill Tingley
Executive Director, L.A.W.

[BridgetDupont-Tingley, Editor, L.A.W.]

Dear Piggy,

I was a juror on a Federal case in downtown Detroit years ago. It was a City of Detroit P.O.'s versus a local married couple. The case involved the city P.O. blasting past the couples car on the left via a city side street. The P.O.'s had their lights flashing, but no siren. They were responding to an officer down call. The couple made a left hand turn into their parents driveway just as the police car went to pass them. The couple did not turn on their left blinker light as they had not seen any cars behind them only seconds earlier when they turned down this street.

As you can imagine, a crash happened.

The police car slammed into the side of the other car as it made its turn. The police car was traveling at a high enough speed that it buried the right front and side of the other car into a nearby tree trunk. The occupants of the other car received numerous injuries although none were life threatening. The police had no injuries. One car was a total loss. The other had minor damage done to it.

Testimony went on daily for a week. We heard police officer after police offier take the stand, local citizens, family members, doctors, employers and the like. After hearing all background evidence and information, especially the law in this state, neither party ever admitted they should have done differenlty. The police stood by no sirens with their lights as it is often done by their brothers and the couple felt a left hand turn signal was only needed if traffic had been behind or in front of them which it had not been only seconds earlier. The police said they would have stopped had they seen a left hand blinker. The citizens said they would have pulled over had they heard sirens. Thus, neither were to blame. It was the other parties fault.

After a week of testimony, the city was going to loose over 1 million dollars due to the police actions. All jurors but one (me) felt the police were the most at fault as they are the professionals and held to a higher standard than most when it comes to safety and security of residents. The other jurors were angry at the police for almost being above the law on this issue and making excuses for a wrong done. The jurors wanted to punish the police and send a cash signal that a wrong is a wrong. They were angry enough to do this and let the citizens off the hook even though they did wrong too. Most jurors felt the P.O.'s were highly negligent in their actions and many brought up instances of how police drive on the freeway, side streets and so forth when not responding to serious calls as evidence of their high handedness. I was the only juror who stood up and said wait a minute, what you are saying is true, but don't forget that both parties were at fault. The citizen is required to use their turn signal by law when making a left or right turn, thus they were partly at fault for not doing this. Likewise, I voted that the policemen were also at fault as directed under the law and they certainly knew better. In Michigan, police are required by law to have their sirens on when they have their lights going and responding to an emergency of any kind. They can't just have lights going without the siren - that is illegal (sadly, this still happens all the time. I doubt the law has changed on this issue either).

In the end, the city still lost the case. My single vote was powerful though as it caused the final damages awarded to the drivers to be dropped dramatically from over 1 million to around 250K. My vote made clear - you are each at fault. As you can imagine, the prosecution team and citizens were unhappy with me as I cost them a boat load of money (mind you they were not out of pocket for medical expenses or work pay as their company covered that for over a year. Their car insurance covered their car replacement cost and they even found a way to finish graduate school at the companies cost during this difficult time. So, they had no real cash losses during this time - only the term pain & suffering was brought up). The defense was equally unhappy with a guilty verdict, but at a lesser extent since the damages were much less than expected.

All other jurors felt the couples were wronged and deserved high compensation for the harm done to them. I voted against both parties as the fault was equal in my eyes. They each made mistakes. They each could have done a different action that would have caused this accident NOT to happen at all had they each been more aware. They both deserved to be punished for their poor decision making skills. The police knew the rules and law and should have practiced it accordingly. The citizens knew the rules and laws and should have practiced accordingly as well. They were both at fault. It's high time in our society that people stop playing the victim role and stand up for what is right and what is wrong. If they weren't wise enough to do that themselves, well I was glad to lend a helping hand.

There are certainly great police officers throughout our state and country. They do us an important service. But, as Bill mentioned in his article and I noted in my follow up here, even the police have to respect the laws in which they are there to enforce for you and I. They need to hold themselves in line with those rules and regulations so, that proper protection can be done for all of us. This is important so, the good they do is not canceled out by an accidental bad deed when someone puts themselves above the law due to their badge and uniform.

Regards,

[Edubya]

Looking at the comment by PIGGY, I can only say that we aren't trying to discount that officers do indeed risk their lives and put themselves at great personal risk every day to provide a safer environment for the general public. We appreciate all that you do, we appreciate your presence. I for one, feel that officers, firefighters, paramedics and other public service employees are severely underpaid.
What we don't appreciate is when some (not all!) members of the police force choose to abuse their power in different ways.
The situation where Eric Bryant started legal proceedings against an officer for illegal parking was reponded to by the Assistant Chief of Police of that town saying that "Requiring an officer find a legal parking space and wasting an inordinate amount of time trying to get to where they are going is unreasonable."
In this case the ACoP is stating quite clearly that his officers can park where they want if they're leaving their cars to walk into any establishment. So they are not bound by the parking laws of the city. This is why everyone is so angry. We don't hate you fine folks, we just hate it when someone with a bit of power allows their ego to override good judgement.

[Bridget Dupont-Tingley, Editor L.A.W.]

Dear Mr. Driskell,

As Editor of L.A.W. I am choosing to remove your lengthy blog posting as it was not tied to any direct article or comment at our website.

In addition, you used some rather inappropriate language at times and we prefer not to see that at L.A.W.

Clearly, you needed a place to vent your frustrations over a recent court room event locally. Sometimes court rooms are places of proper distributions of justice, sometimes they are not. Since none of us were there, we have only your side to rely upon.

Regardless, your rant is simply not appropriate for our site and it will be removed.

Regards,