Speeding motor cyclist killed by not-speeding cruiser

stainless1911 · May 24, 2011

I like you man,

stainless1911 · May 25, 2011

They ran him into the ground. Simple.

The investigation, is how best to cover their butts.

KBCraig · May 25, 2011

I finally had a chance to watch the video, which was of no value at all in deciding right or wrong.

That makes me wonder, like others, why the Fowlerville car's video is being embargoed.

ETA: as for the suggestion that the rider couldn't have been ticketed unless he was stopped, I can only echo what others have said: Radar cameras. Red light cameras. Toll booth cameras. Thousands of Americans are ticketed every day based on nothing more than a photo of their license plate.

tcfla · May 25, 2011

Drive?

You all are auguring with a big monkey with a carrot in its mouth. His kids can't drive! They are in zoos. No cars. Now if they steal bananas or carrots, bingo!

HKcarrier · May 25, 2011

I know... beating a dead horse...

but, the photos: http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/...20110517&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=105170801&Ref=PH

look like the crusier was struck in the back corner, at an angle, not straight into the rear. This, to me, is indicating the cruiser was NOT heading straight down the expressway and veered to the left causing the car to be angled to the lanes and the motorcycle to strike it as it traveled parallel to the traffic lines.

T Mack · May 26, 2011

HKcarrier said:
For all the police abuses that people bitch about on here, I am pretty surprised to see the "one less idiot" crowd....

And people who say "my kid woudln't do that" you can't know that... it was a bad decision, no doubt.... Your kid wouldn't bump his motorcycle up to 100 "just to see what it was like for a min"? Say he did that, since it was 4am and on a deserted highway... then saw the cop lights and freaked out and said "oh F, dad is going to be PISSED.... well there's no way this cop can catch me... there's no one around... *activate warp speed*...

To be honest, I don't have as much of a problem with the kid crashing and getting killed as I do that I think they DID IT ON PURPOSE. I think they crashed him on purpose.

THAT is what I have the big problem with. I"ve seen cops on "cop chase" shows trying to run into a kid on a 125 dirt bike who was running away from them. Trying to kill a 14 year old kid because HOW DARE he ride his dirt bike on the road, then make a stupid decision to try to run.

Just another example that the cops out OUT OF CONTROL and will do whatever they want, whenever they want... and people will just say "idiot deserved it".

Nice.

I'm a biker and agree totally..
All kids are pretty much idiots... Thats why they are called kids...
He did not deserve to die...

HKcarrier · Jun 17, 2011

Update on this story...

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/...inst-police-fatal-high-speed-motorcycle-chase

As I said from the start the cop was zig zagging back and forth in front of the biker... then they come up with this BULLCRAP story that he was trying to "get out of the way"... if you're looking to get out of the way, you PULL OFF THE ROADWAY..

This makes me so angry. It goes without saying that this kid was TOTALLY wrong and partly responsible for this... but the cops hold some responsibility for it too. Bad policy, etc.

sudden valley gunner · Jun 18, 2011

xDayan · Jun 18, 2011

IMHO there's nothin wrong with going 100 + mph when no ones on the road like at 4 am, but it was wrong to run from the cop, I'd he just pulled over and said in a non smart ass way he just lost track of his speed he woulda gotten a 600 buck ticket and maybe lost his license, the cop was in the wrong for chasing for so long, Get his tag number then back off and arrest him at home

Edit: he was drunk and the officer was trying to get out of way, the guy just wasn't skilled enough ( or maybe too drunk) to swerve into the other lane, and I personly need about 20 feet or so to switch lanes at 130 or so, and 10 feet at >90 mph , there no excuse for riding when drunk

marshaul · Jun 18, 2011

It's ridiculous how many people make arguments like "driving at 130 mph makes one a clear and present menace to anyone around, so he got what he deserved."

How, then, does one explain the German autobahn, where they police do not murder someone simply for driving fast?

I argue that intentionally causing an accident at 130 mph is far more dangerous, to those involved as well as bystanders, than simply allowing a motorcyclist to drive at 104 mph.

Those who support these arbitrary limits and egregious enforcement techniques are making are roads far more dangerous than most speeders.

Don't believe me? Ask a traffic engineer.

marshaul · Jun 18, 2011

xDayan said:
Edit: he was drunk and the officer was trying to get out of way, the guy just wasn't skilled enough ( or maybe too drunk) to swerve into the other lane, and I personly need about 20 feet or so to switch lanes at 130 or so, and 10 feet at >90 mph , there no excuse for riding when drunk

Where's my BS flag?

This story is patently, on its face, obviously and undeniably, a load of BS.

Read it again:

When that motorist passed, Morse said Miller, who was in the right hand lane, then activated his overhead lights and was traveling at nearly 45 mph when he spotted Stamm — who had moved to the right hand lane — in his rearview mirror.

The officer wanted to be in the lane the motorist wasn’t, Morse said, so he moved to the left hand lane to give Stamm more room. However, Stamm moved to the same lane as the officer, who again moved to the right hand lane.

Stamm again made the same move as the officer, but at his speed Stamm quickly closed the gap and struck the officer’s cruiser, which caused Stamm to crash in the median.

That's obviously, ludicrously false. The cop didn't try to get in another lane, with the motorcyclist following his every lane change. Even a drunken retard wouldn't do that. I mean, seriously, wtf? Anybody here believes that load of crap?

Translated via common sense: "Well, I got in front of him, and he changed lanes, so I got in front of him again, so he changed lanes again, so I got in front of him again, cuz you see I was totally gonna stop him, and then he hit me. WIN!"

HKcarrier · Jun 18, 2011

Anyone who claims it's uber-dangerous to go 100 on a high performance motorcycle has clearly NEVER ridden one... therefore is speaking out of their ace.

buster81 · Jun 18, 2011

These cops can't even make up a believable story. They should be put in jail for being bad liars, among other things.

Shovelhead · Jun 18, 2011

Big Gay Al said:
If I had been one of the pursuing officers, I would have gone fast enough to get close enough to get his license plate, then I would have called off the chase and arranged for officers to sit near his home and wait for him to show up.

But maybe that's just me.

That sounds like a "They should have shot the gun out of the bad guy's hand" answer.

xxx.jakk.xxx · Jun 18, 2011

For anyone saying the kid deserved it or that there's on less idiot, would you say the same thing if the police had pull out a firearm and shot the kid for speeding? It's essentially the same thing. They stopped him with deadly force for speeding, evading and reckless driving (That's all I can see from what the story says).

I guess we only feel sympathy when someone is shot without reason, not just killed by the police.

eye95 · Jun 18, 2011

xDayan said:
...the cop was in the wrong for chasing for so long, Get his tag number then back off and arrest him at home...

Once again, this is not possible. Many jurisdictions expressly prohibit such arrests because they are impossible to prosecute. "Prove it was me" is a simple, but wildly effective, defense.

The choices are to stay with him until he stops, or let him go forever. That's it. What the post proposes is not a viable option.

If a department chooses never to pursue those who run from the police, running from the police will soon become the near exclusive reaction to an attempted stop. Dumb idea.

Deadcenter45 · Jun 18, 2011

xDayan said:
*snip*

Edit: he was drunk and the officer was trying to get out of way, the guy just wasn't skilled enough ( or maybe too drunk) to swerve into the other lane, and I personly need about 20 feet or so to switch lanes at 130 or so, and 10 feet at >90 mph , there no excuse for riding when drunk

Do you know how ridiculous this is?

60 mph = 88 feet per second

To change lanes in 20' at 60 mph would take about 250 milliseconds

Do the math.

Android + Tapatalk

Kirbinator · Jun 19, 2011

One of my coworkers owns or used to own a bike like that. He told me that it was too light for going fast on, but would easily do it. High-speed vibrations can be upsetting, but this guy was obviously drunk and had something else on his mind.... Maybe this was a case of suicide by cop?

sudden valley gunner · Jun 21, 2011

buster81 said:
These cops can't even make up a believable story. They should be put in jail for being bad liars, among other things.

Yes lying on a police report is a felony (perjury) try to find a prosecutor who will prosecute though.

Cops who do this or even are misleading in their reports are untrustworthy and should be fired. http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Cops-who-lie-don-t-always-lose-jobs-1262936.php

HandyHamlet · Jun 21, 2011

Kirbinator said:
One of my coworkers owns or used to own a bike like that. He told me that it was too light for going fast on, but would easily do it. High-speed vibrations can be upsetting, but this guy was obviously drunk and had something else on his mind.... Maybe this was a case of suicide by cop?

Those bikes are direct descendants of their racing versions.

They are designed for speed.

High speed vibrations??? WTF.

Your co-worker has no idea what he is talking about.

Speeding motor cyclist killed by not-speeding cruiser

Banned

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member