It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

3 off duty cops drive wrong way on highway, crash into tractor trailer, guess who got breathalizer?

page: 6
23
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 07:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
a reply to: semperfortis

I await your follow up toxicology report that you intend to supply us with.


I'm sorry, was there a question there? Because it looks a snarky, petulant statement to me.

They said the truck driver wasn't impaired. Did I miss where they handed out copies of the test results to the press?

^ that's a rhetorical question, by the way.



A rhetorical question is a figure of speech in the form of a question that is asked in order to make a point, rather than to elicit an answer.[1] Though classically stated as a proper question, such a rhetorical device may be posed declaratively by implying a question, and therefore may not always require a question mark when written.




The face making sums it all up nicely champ


The name calling is even better and against ATS rules.....

I am not your "champ"


Indeed. I guess I should flag every comment when somebody says "friend" or "pal" or shamrock. Those are all names, after all. If you were offended by "champ" I dunno what to tell you.

Toodles


www.urbandictionary.com...

Toodles


Sweet source!

champ2
CHamp/
nouninformal
noun: champ; plural noun: champs
a champion.
Origin
mid 19th century: abbreviation.

I can do it too!




posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 07:25 PM
link   
For all we know, the cop who posted the alcohol pics could have been the designated driver, however driving the wrong way, IF he was the designated driver, is very odd. I do hope they do recover so they are able to determine what really happened. Though, with him having brain surgery according to reports, we have to consider the possibility that he might not recover fully enough to give a statement as to what happened that night, and that morning.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Same here in Canada, a close friend of ours T-Boned a car that was turning left against a red light and the passenger was killed instantly. Our friend was seriously injured and they did indeed check him for blood alcohol once they got him stabilized.

It was the other cars fault but they checked everyone involved. The poor guy has never ever gotten over the fact that the passenger died.

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: SirKonstantin
What they do here is say ..oh it took too long for us to get a sample..case closed, sorry there is nothing we can do. Anyone who does not see that there is an acountability problem need give their head a good solid shake..maybee dunk in a tub of real cold water.
Also how it's done here: older cops tell the younger ones how to skate by on an impaired charge..keep a mickey in the glove box..if you get into an accident grab the bottle a take a swig.

www.vancouversun.com...
edit on 20-3-2015 by vonclod because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-3-2015 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: Witness2008

And there is absolutely no reason here to make any assumptions that they wouldn't. Threads like this should never even make their way to a place like this. Creating big piles of dung out of virtually nothing but someone's speculation because they salivated over this happening to cops, when in fact it's just an every day tragedy that happens to all kinds of people. Even saints like the ones commenting here. And it's abhorant. In my opinion.


I for one am making no assumptions, just interested in the outcome considering the atmosphere out there, especially that New York better than thou police mentality.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   
For those that did not notice, everyone in the officer's car was either dead or in "critical condition," meaning that testing them for alcohol becomes a matter of blood work, which is not the main worry of those trying to save their lives, which also means that it will take a bit longer for the results to come back. Longer than it took to test the truck driver. That does not mean they will not test the cops. It is probable that the reason the police released the information about the truck driver not having any alcohol is because that is one of the few results they had at the time. Granted of course that it is blatantly obvious who is at fault. But giving them the benefit of the doubt, they wish to get information about whether the driver of the car was drunk before they say whose fault it was. Now if the truck driver had been drinking I really wonder what would have happened. Surely they would not have put him at fault though. You never know I suppose.

I'm thinking that they are going to want to determine "why" the car was on the wrong side of the road. It is completely possible for a sober person to do something that stupid. Especially a cop, lol. So I'm guessing that they want to determine why the car was on the wrong side of the road. Why they did not come out and say the car was at fault I'm not positive on, unless again it is just to establish the "why" first. But again, it is obvious who is at fault.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: JiggyPotamus

If the truck driver had been impaired at all it would automatically be his fault. Over his hours, his fault. Restricted road, his fault.

Truck drivers are held to a completely different standard than car drivers.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 04:18 AM
link   
For those saying that blood alcohol tests are the only option on an unconscious person I say BS. Mouth swabs are as fast as breathalyzers. And blood tests don't take that long considering they take them at DUI checkpoints.


Considered an intrusive method, a blood alcohol test can quickly determine the amount of alcohol in the blood at the time the sample is taken. Since the body continues to break down alcohol at a steady rate after drinking, the time that passes between drinking and collecting the blood sample will affect the results. Therefore, it is important to have the test conducted as quickly as possible from the time of the driving incident.


So again I'll ask (not rhetorically as not to piss off our resident LEOS here) why no mention of any test or results being done on the officer who was driving and only the truck driver?
edit on 21-3-2015 by IslandOfMisfitToys because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 07:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
For those saying that blood alcohol tests are the only option on an unconscious person I say BS. Mouth swabs are as fast as breathalyzers. And blood tests don't take that long considering they take them at DUI checkpoints.


Considered an intrusive method, a blood alcohol test can quickly determine the amount of alcohol in the blood at the time the sample is taken. Since the body continues to break down alcohol at a steady rate after drinking, the time that passes between drinking and collecting the blood sample will affect the results. Therefore, it is important to have the test conducted as quickly as possible from the time of the driving incident.


So again I'll ask (not rhetorically as not to piss off our resident LEOS here) why no mention of any test or results being done on the officer who was driving and only the truck driver?


They said in a few articles, I posted some quote a few pages back, they're getting warrants to get the results of the samples taken. My guess, and only resident LEOs would know, is it's a Union Rep thing (a lawyer speak, if you will). Because they can't just go into their medical records while they're unconscious, would be my guess, anymore than they can go into yours or mine. They would possibly need a warrant to that as well. So even if the results were back and posted to the records, they can't be told them without a warrant. HIPA thing? Again, guessing. Also truck driver may not have been as severely injured as the other two, so he was able to take a Breathalyzer and get immediate results.
edit on 3/21/2015 by Anyafaj because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Anyafaj

So basically my assumptions were correct and this smells of cover-up through and through.


edit on 21-3-2015 by IslandOfMisfitToys because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Besides the union thing, if they did a blood test they can't release the results without a court order. It's considered part of their treatment records and can only be released with consent of the patient.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 08:35 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Besides the union thing, if they did a blood test they can't release the results without a court order. It's considered part of their treatment records and can only be released with consent of the patient.



So as I said, HIPA, or whatever the dang initials are. LOL



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

If it was done through a blood test, by a doctor at a hospital, then yes. If it was a breath test done by a police officer, no.

The other reason it's not released is time to get results. Some hospitals will release it if asked officially, many won't, but it depends on the local laws. But it also takes awhile to get the results back, so they go to the DA for any trial.
edit on 3/21/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)


(post by IslandOfMisfitToys removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Just to be clear. That still reeks of cover-up. At least on part of the officer's on scene since I'm fairly confident that the cops on scene test even unconscious civilians and don't wait until they get to the hospital. Since time is of the essence as alcohol is processed fairly quickly in our bodies.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Mouth swabs generally don't give you a level, just a positive or negative result, and are inaccurate. We used to use them when I worked at the airport and found that older batches frequently gave false positive.

That or blood draw are the only ways that you can run a test on an unconscious person.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
That or blood draw are the only ways that you can run a test on an unconscious person.


I think positive vs. negative would have been better than nothing?

Am I the only one who sees that the on scene officers made the choice to do no tests on the unconscious officer driver. That use of discretion is what I'm talking about.

If it is SOP to test ALL involved in an accident why were the cops allowed the time for their bodies to process any alcohol?

And like I posted earlier cops have no qualms performing blood tests at random DUI checkpoints so there is no excuse as to not being able to in this case. They chose not to. Wonder why?
edit on 21-3-2015 by IslandOfMisfitToys because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

I found out my disconnect. Cops don't physically take the blood themselves. They need a nurse/doctor for that.

So no on scene cover up after all.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join