Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:11PM   Printer-friendly
from the unsafe-at-any-speed dept.

The Los Angeles Daily News reports that the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office declined to press charges against a sheriff’s deputy who fatally struck cyclist Milton Olin Jr. while he was apparently distracted by his mobile digital computer. “Wood entered the bicycle lane as a result of inattention caused by typing into his (Mobile Digital Computer),” according to the declination letter prepared by the Justice System Integrity Division of the District Attorney’s Office and released Wednesday. “He was responding to a deputy who was inquiring whether the fire investigation had been completed. Since Wood was acting within the course and scope of his duties when he began to type his response, under Vehicle Code section 23123.5, he acted lawfully.”

To establish the crime of vehicular manslaughter, prosecutors would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wood was criminally negligent. While Wood was texting shortly before the collision, there was no evidence he was texting or doing anything else that would have distracted him at the time of the collision. Olin’s family has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the county, the Sheriff’s Department and the deputy, alleging driver negligence and seeking to obtain more information about the incident. “Just because the law allows someone to do something while driving doesn’t mean they are allowed to do something unsafely while driving,” says Eric Bruins. “Hitting someone from behind is very clear evidence that whatever was going on in that car was not safe and should have been considered negligent.”

Update: A day after prosecutors declined to file charges against a distracted sheriff’s deputy who fatally struck a cyclist in Calabasas in December, an official with the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department said it is launching its own administrative probe into the deputy’s behavior.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Wednesday September 03 2014, @03:16PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday September 03 2014, @03:16PM (#88936)

    Last time I heard, the police were supposed to obey the law.

    Unless they're doing so to maintain their cover if they're undercover, then yes, they are supposed to obey the law. But they often don't and get away with it, because they know full well that good old Joe down at the precinct would never arrest them.

    One cop in my local area actually developed a bit of a reputation among police because he did enforce the law against his fellow officers, including arresting the chief of a neighboring jurisdiction for DUI. That should tell you how rare it is for cops to actually be penalized for breaking the law, on-duty or not.

    --
    The inverse of "I told you so" is "Nobody could have predicted"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by Blackmoore on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:47PM

    by Blackmoore (57) on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:47PM (#89004) Journal
    Police no longer "serve and protect" they "enforce"

    now how they do this without having a legal degree is beyond me.