Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Canberra’s most creative
residential property specialists

Police car hits 19yr old in Civic

By johnboy 24 August 2012 22

ACT Policing is investigating an incident early today (Friday, August 24), in which a 19-year-old pedestrian collided with a police car and received minor injuries.

The police car was on a routine, city-based patrol and turning the corner of London Circuit and Verity Lane, in Civic, when the incident occurred. The man fell to the ground and struck his head.

He was conveyed to Calvary Hospital for treatment and was later released, suffering only minor soreness.

ACT Policing’s Collision Investigation and Reconstruction Team (CIRT) is investigating with, as is standard procedure, oversight provided by the AFP’s Professional Standards.

Any witnesses to the incident who have not yet spoken to police are urged to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
22 Responses to
Police car hits 19yr old in Civic
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Leon 4:41 pm 29 Apr 13

Jivrashia said :

I think the intersection has a lot to answer for.
…Car can’t seen pedestrian.
Pedestrian can’t see car.

That’s a genuine problem when people walk along the footpath.

It doesn’t apply in this case, because:
(1) the pedestrians were “standing in the entrance to the lane” (which looks like a breach of Road Rule 230: “A pedestrian … must not stay on the road longer than necessary to cross the road safely.”);
(2) The report indicates that the police driver had already seen them;
(3) Even though the police van should have given way, the guy’s mates had to pull him out of its way: “Two members of the group grabbed hold of the male on the upper and lower arm and started to pull him backwards out of the way.”

This guy was undoubtedly as drunk and stupid as I was when after a few ciders I ran the front tyre of my little motorbike into the rear bumper of a paddy wagon. In my case the police didn’t notice. In this case the police were kind enough to ensure that the guy got medical attention.

p1 10:49 am 16 Apr 13

Sounds like it wasn’t so much a vehicle accident, as a uncoordinated pedestrian that fell over when unbalanced by his friends.

Interesting question raised about the actually TIN issued though – if I was the cop I would dispute it. 🙂

Jivrashia 10:35 am 16 Apr 13

I think the intersection has a lot to answer for.

Check it out on streetview.

Car can’t seen pedestrian.
Pedestrian can’t see car.

bundah 9:19 am 16 Apr 13

Leon said :

A freedom of information request shows that police don’t understand the rules for giving way to pedestrians.

The police report indicates that the Constable driving the police van breached Rule 73: Giving way at a T–intersection, which states that “If the driver is turning left (except if the driver is using a slip lane) from the continuing road [i.e. London Circuit] into the terminating road [i.e. Verity Lane], the driver must give way to any pedestrian on the terminating road at or near the intersection.”

The Constable was not given a Traffic Infringement Notice caution for breaching Rule 73, but instead for breaching Rule 75: “Giving way when entering a road-related area or adjacent land from a road,” even though the police report does not indicate that the Constable entered a road-related area or adjacent land.

The police report says:

“Police were travelling east bound on London Circuit, Canberra City. As they passed Verity Lane they noticed a group of persons gathering down the lane. The driver of the Police vehicle, Constable [redacted], stopped the vehicle and reversed to enable a left hand turn into Verity Lane.

“ A group of 3 to 4 males were standing in the entrance to the lane. Constable [redacted] stopped the vehicle and sounded the horn and gestured to the males to move out of the way.

The males have looked at the Police vehicle and made eye contact with Police. The group stepped backward, except for one male who was still standing still. Two members of the group grabbed hold of the male on the upper and lower arm and started to pull him backwards out of the way.

As the male stepped backwards, he stumbled and lost balance, at the same time Constable [redacted] started to move forward. The male fell over and a small bump was felt in the vehicle. Constable [redacted] stopped and reversed back about one metre.

On exiting the vehicle Police observed the male person had a small graze to the back of his head to which they applied a bandage …”

It would appear that the police are not at fault in this instance.Standing in the middle of the lane and then failing to move out of the way when your friends were clearly able to do so suggests that he may have been a smartarse.

Leon 9:07 am 16 Apr 13

A freedom of information request shows that police don’t understand the rules for giving way to pedestrians.

The police report indicates that the Constable driving the police van breached Rule 73: Giving way at a T–intersection, which states that “If the driver is turning left (except if the driver is using a slip lane) from the continuing road [i.e. London Circuit] into the terminating road [i.e. Verity Lane], the driver must give way to any pedestrian on the terminating road at or near the intersection.”

The Constable was not given a Traffic Infringement Notice caution for breaching Rule 73, but instead for breaching Rule 75: “Giving way when entering a road-related area or adjacent land from a road,” even though the police report does not indicate that the Constable entered a road-related area or adjacent land.

The police report says:

“Police were travelling east bound on London Circuit, Canberra City. As they passed Verity Lane they noticed a group of persons gathering down the lane. The driver of the Police vehicle, Constable [redacted], stopped the vehicle and reversed to enable a left hand turn into Verity Lane.

“ A group of 3 to 4 males were standing in the entrance to the lane. Constable [redacted] stopped the vehicle and sounded the horn and gestured to the males to move out of the way.

The males have looked at the Police vehicle and made eye contact with Police. The group stepped backward, except for one male who was still standing still. Two members of the group grabbed hold of the male on the upper and lower arm and started to pull him backwards out of the way.

As the male stepped backwards, he stumbled and lost balance, at the same time Constable [redacted] started to move forward. The male fell over and a small bump was felt in the vehicle. Constable [redacted] stopped and reversed back about one metre.

On exiting the vehicle Police observed the male person had a small graze to the back of his head to which they applied a bandage …”

Pork Hunt 4:42 pm 07 Nov 12

astrojax said :

FXST01 said :

This is why pedestrians should be registered. ;-P

and only allowed to wear lycra… why don’t we have mandatory safety helmets for pedestrians yet? crazy country…

Looks like you found your R’s again after that ANUS debacle… 🙂

astrojax 3:58 pm 07 Nov 12

FXST01 said :

This is why pedestrians should be registered. ;-P

and only allowed to wear lycra… why don’t we have mandatory safety helmets for pedestrians yet? crazy country…

Leon 2:59 pm 07 Nov 12

In a media release issued on 7 November, Officer-in-Charge of Traffic Operations Sergeant Rod Anderson is quoted as saying “If you breach the road rules and place your own life or the lives of others in danger, we will catch you.”

Let’s hope they soon catch the person who in this case breached the road rules and put people’s lives in danger.

Henry82 4:07 pm 25 Aug 12

Not really surprised this happened. People always walk onto the road without looking, especially crossing East Row towards Maccas.

FXST01 7:59 am 25 Aug 12

This is why pedestrians should be registered. ;-P

Cheap 12:17 am 25 Aug 12

rhino said :

According to the police, all crashes are down to speeding or drink driving, so the cop must have been speeding or drunk and is clearly a hoon. That’s the conclusion that would have been drawn for anyone else.

Actually the police would probably say that the victim who was drunk and speedwalking when he was apprehended by a quick thinking police officer on London circuit.

DrKoresh 9:13 pm 24 Aug 12

Poor kid, I hope FedPol paid for the ambulance for him, unless it was entirely and undeniably his fault i.e, he was indeed just shitfaced and stumbled in front of the car.

Antagonist 6:47 pm 24 Aug 12

p1 said :

ACT Policing is investigating an incident early today (Friday, August 24), in which a 19-year-old pedestrian collided with a police car and received minor injuries.

Interesting turn of phrase. It tends to suggest that the pedestrian hit as cop car that was just sitting there.

Whinge news reported it as the police colliding with the pedestrian. Somebody must be telling porkys!

Ozi 6:03 pm 24 Aug 12

Pork Hunt said :

Were the cops driving a white Commodore?

I think that’s case closed.

Pork Hunt 5:40 pm 24 Aug 12

Were the cops driving a white Commodore?

troll-sniffer 5:29 pm 24 Aug 12

rhino said :

According to the police, all crashes are down to speeding or drink driving, so the cop must have been speeding or drunk and is clearly a hoon. That’s the conclusion that would have been drawn for anyone else.

Shame they don’t have speed cameras on London Circuit, would never have happened.

bundah 5:28 pm 24 Aug 12

Special G said :

p1 said :

ACT Policing is investigating an incident early today (Friday, August 24), in which a 19-year-old pedestrian collided with a police car and received minor injuries.

Interesting turn of phrase. It tends to suggest that the pedestrian hit as cop car that was just sitting there.

Given the time and location you may be right there.

So by saying that they collided they’re not immediately apportioning blame to either party and therefore leaving it open to investigation.

rhino 5:15 pm 24 Aug 12

According to the police, all crashes are down to speeding or drink driving, so the cop must have been speeding or drunk and is clearly a hoon. That’s the conclusion that would have been drawn for anyone else.

p1 5:14 pm 24 Aug 12

Primal said :

p1 said :

Interesting turn of phrase. It tends to suggest that the pedestrian hit as cop car that was just sitting there.

Head-on collision? Not so great phrasing. But if, let’s say, the ped was ‘tired and emotional’ and stumbled into the side of the cop car, it’s about as good as they could describe it.

…and if that is what happened, great. But if the cop car hit the person (even if they stepped in front of it) then it reads weird.

Special G 4:51 pm 24 Aug 12

p1 said :

ACT Policing is investigating an incident early today (Friday, August 24), in which a 19-year-old pedestrian collided with a police car and received minor injuries.

Interesting turn of phrase. It tends to suggest that the pedestrian hit as cop car that was just sitting there.

Given the time and location you may be right there.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site