|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
144.135.107.2
In Reply to: Justice and some good advice posted by Peter Gunn on April 22, 2005 at 18:15:10:
........except for the poor person who got his run into.
Police chaser 'incinerated' in car explosion
By Jano Gibson
April 22, 2005 - 11:39AM•
•
•
•
Police became the hunted last night when a man in a Ford utility chased and rammed an unmarked police vehicle along a 3 km stretch of road in North Mead last night.The pursuit came to a fiery end when the man's car veered into oncoming traffic and burst in flames, killing the Ford's driver.
Police had pulled the man over in Briens Rd, Northmead, for a minor traffic infringement at 10.15pm.
But as police officers prepared to approach the Ford, it switched into reverse and accelerated towards their vehicle.
Parramatta Local Area Commander, Superintendent Geoff Beresford, said police were forced to take evasive action as the utility vehicle charged at them.
"He accelerated past the police vehicle still in reverse. So he is (now) behind the police vehicle. He then accelerated forward again aiming at the police vehicle in an apparent attempt to ram it," he said.
Police sped away to avoid further collisions but the man continued the hunt, clipping three other vehicles."It was a case of him speeding up to catch the police and the police speeding up to keep a safe distance," the Superintendent said.
He said the police did not reach an "excessive speed" along the 70-80 km/h stretch of road.
Near Briens Road and Edward Street, Northmead, the utility crossed the median strip and smashed into a Falcon.
The utility burst into flames, incinerating the vehicle and its driver.
AdvertisementAdvertisement
Briens Road resident, Daniel Adair, said he was watching television with his family when the accident happened metres from his house.As he and another man went to help flames began licking the side of the car before the vehicle exploded.
"It (the explosion) probably lifted the car half a metre off the ground," the 27-year-old restaurant manager said.
He watched helplessly as the driver was incinerated.
"It looked like a man-sized lump of something burning. It was pretty terrible," he said.
Mr Adair said the man appeared to be on the passenger side of the vehicle when it exploded, indicating the driver was unable to escape from the driver-side door.
The two police officers who had been pursued were not injured in the accident but were treated for shock and will undergo counselling.
Superintendent Beresford said the flames were too fierce for police to attempt to save the man.
Police expect to identify the dead man later today.
The driver of the other vehicle is in a stable condition at Westmead Hospital after sustaining several fractures.
Police have appealed for witnesses to contact Parramatta Police (02) 9633 0736............Absolutely no sympathy from me except for the innocent guy who was run into.
SmileSox
Follow Ups:
Last week in my joking post about having AA members visit deadbeats to break their kneecaps you replied that sounded a bit extreme.Now an idiot burning to death is a "pretty good outcome"?
That's a big policy swing. :^ )
I have no problem with it, and wish more people who behaved like that would get such an instant comeuppance. It would save the taxpayers a lot of time and money. But maybe you ought to clarify your position.
You buy an amp from someone for 3 grand. He takes the money, never sends the amp. His just desserts are? ____________________
........…. I re-read what I wrote last week and probably some clarification is needed.In your scenario last week I was actually concerned that good honest people can feel “helpless” and “ignored by the authorities” that they felt the need to take matters into their own hands
I absolutely in no way have any sympathies for the criminals. I get concerned that when people do take matters into their own hands that it is them that will feel the wrath of the law and not the scumbag criminal.
Last week I said \\\ It is unfortunate that your idea actually has merit…../// what I meant by that was it is unfortunate that people need to do and consider taking drastic action because they are let down by law enforcement.
Also I said \\\ It is little wonder that vigilante retribution can actually seem like a good idea/// what I meant by that is retribution only occurs because the victoms of crime often feel that the criminal with get away with it and no other course of action is open to the honest people other than to deal with it themselves. The only reason I don’t advocate people-power retribution is that it is often the good honest people who will get punished for their actions and not the criminal.
You say \\\ You buy an amp from someone for 3 grand. He takes the money, never sends the amp. His just desserts are?/// All I can say Peter is that it would be a brave sole indeed who did not wish to pay me. Also, I would not spend 3k without knowing who and where the guy lived/worked etc.
So I hope that has clarified that I am NOT a bleeding heart for the crims.
FWIW I believe in the death penalty for major crimes.
SmileSox
You mistook me, and vice versa. I thought you were implying that left to a group, it would revert to a sort of mob rule which always gets out of hand. I wasn't thinking you were thinking the innocent would get punished.The difference in the two crimes is cause and effect.
The swindler is guilty in the 1st degree because from the get go he knew he was going to hurt someone, and he proceeded with his crime of duplicity. The drunk smashing into the cop car was simply imbalanced or out of his head at the moment, and never had an intention of doing what he did.
However, the net result of these crimes vary as well. The swindler only cheats one out of money or an item. The car crasher could actually take an innocent life. One has a guiltier cause but less dire effect, and the other is the opposite. Should they be considered of the same consequence then?
As for the death penalty, if you are going to do it there can't be all the haggling. If you are certain, and the person gets it, it should be done within a month of sentencing.
Those not getting it, but getting life, should go to prison yards in new mexico with no conveniences. That or hard labour camps to repay their debt to society thru work.
.........Yes, I think a swindler is a first rate scumbag criminal. He purposely and mindfully sets out to deliberately steal money from people. I believe anyone caught and convicted of doing this to multiple people should receive at least 5 years gaol.The guy who got incinerated is a different beast. It is not clear if he was drunk or high on drugs or in fact was desperate not to be pulled-over because of other criminal matters. However, once he made the conscious decision to ram the Police car and then chase the Police car he deserves anything that happens.
I do take your point that the guy in the car may not have premeditated to break the law so is not as bad as the swindler in that regard. However, his actions that could easily lead to him killing the Police or other motorist need to be taken into account.
Rightly or wrongly, I have always viewed criminals as scumbags and I have always viewed the criminal who physically hurts people to be worse than the swindler. Having said that, here in Australia the common house burglar is not sentenced harshly enough by the courts.
Having been victim of a house burglar who was on bail for about 18 similar offences and who went on to rob another 5 places after mine before he was actually caught “in the act” is a sad indictment of our soft-handed court system. The crim stole about $100000 worth of goods over the 6 month spree and had off-loaded the goods at a fraction of their true worth. He got 12 months gaol and no restitution order was made. I would have given him 10 years.
I would give the death penalty to those where there is absolute proof that the accused is guilty. If a shadow of doubt exists then the guy gets life! None of this years & years on death row nonsense, 4 weeks after judgement the crim should be executed.
End of rant!
Smile
Sox
I am surprised to hear your system is so lax. I thought you guys were all business down there. :^ )I prefer the method they used in colonial america. They could neither afford, nor be burdened with jailing criminals. You were only in "gaol" until your case was heard, then after that, convicted or not, you were set free. (unless you got the death penalty)
If you were charged with a lesser crime, you might have to do some communty service (or go in the headstocks) and you would also have a mark burned or tattoed on to your hand to signfy you were a one time loser, so if you committed a crime elsewhere they could see you had a record.
The third time you get caught in the act of crime, the penalty is death. So 3 strikes and you're out. No costly jails, and the incentive to be good is obvious.
And 10 years for 18 offences and 100 grand? You are soft, that's easily a 20 year stretch. :^ )
........…… I don’t think reverting to colonial times is the answer. However, I believe the court system needs to be drastically changed to be representative of what the majority of the people want. I think my premise holds true in both Australia and USofA.I could be out of touch but it seems most people believe the sentences given to criminals are too lenient.
My big criticism of the court system here in New South Wales is that it is unbelievably inconsistent.
Examples – A rapist got 18 months gaol. Another gets 18 years gaol – a rapist involved in a “pack-rape” got 55 years gaol!!
The “average” (not a statistical average but from my observations of the media) a rapist gets about 5 to 7 years gaol.A house burglar usually doesn’t get sent to gaol until he is caught several times. However, a magistrate or a Judge may send a first offended to gaol for 7 years.
I think we are sometimes quite harsh on violent criminals down here (I am for it not against it) but it really does depend on the Judge and the Police.
Smile
Sox
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: