Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Excellence in Public Sector consulting

Police car smash in Belconnen

By johnboy 6 November 2012 35

police car smash

ACT Policing is investigating a collision in which two vehicles, including a police car, were extensively damaged and a woman conveyed to hospital.

Around 8.24am today (Tuesday, November 6), two officers were in a marked police car on routine patrol on Belconnen Way when they collided with a Holden Commodore at the intersection of Springvale Drive.

The driver and single occupant of the Commodore, a 24-year-old woman from Charnwood, was conveyed to hospital for observation. Both police officers later self-presented at hospital for assessment.

ACT Policing Collision Investigation and Reconstruction Team (CIRT) attended the scene and is investigating the incident.

Any witnesses to the collision who have not yet spoken to police are urged to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or via the website at www.act.crimestoppers.com.au.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
35 Responses to
Police car smash in Belconnen
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
cranky 6:35 pm 07 Nov 12

vg said :

cranky said :

Do they breath test the Police officer driver on the spot of the accident, as they do all other crash drivers?

No. Generally one cop hands another a brown paper bag full of cash and/ or coke so nothing happens and the whole incident is forgotten.

It’s also helpful as it allows the cop who crashed to get the body of the whistleblower out of the boot quickly and get back to the pub, where they can get hammered in uniform again and look for another innocent civilian to play demolition derby with.

That’s if they’ve got enough time after sleeping with all the local prossies.

I thought I had asked a sensible question.

I can appreciate that iphone piccies of police having a breath test taken could be embarassing, but you don’t need to be Eienstein to appreciate that any cover-up will be commented on. And unfortunately the possibility of a cover up when AFP are investigating themselves is potentially high.

Your comment above only adds fuel to the fire. Can we have faith that this accident will have responsibility fully sheeted home, whoever caused it?

Cheap 4:42 pm 07 Nov 12

Grimm said :

According to the CT article, the police car was “within the speed limit”. I saw the damage to it, and there is no way on earth that happened at 60. My car didn’t look that bad after T-boning somebody at 80, and it’s the same model. Lets see how quick the CIRT team stop investigating this one, or the results are very well hidden.

Depends also on how solid the other car was

Leon 2:58 pm 07 Nov 12

Grimm said :

Lets see how quick the CIRT team stop investigating this one, or the results are very well hidden.

In a media release issued today, 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 catch the people who in this case breached the road rules and put people’s lives in danger.

Grimm 1:23 pm 07 Nov 12

Tetranitrate said :

Yeah but it wasn’t a T-bone collision

I’d call it a T-bone, considering where the damage on the other car was. Right on the front wheel. They would have been at close enough to a 90 degree angle to eachother.

Special G said :

Grimm, with your obvious experience in collision reconstruction ACT Police have a job for you and if as you say the Police car was speeding and that caused the collision then you are justifying all the govt reasoning behind speed cameras.

Nah, I just spent 11 years as a panelbeater and spraypainter. What would I know about crash damage?

Leon 11:55 am 07 Nov 12

quote comment=”443480″]Lets see how quick the CIRT team stop investigating this one, or the results are very well hidden.

… and we’re still waiting for the police to decide whether to book someone over the incident on 24 August when a pedestrian “collided with a police car [that was] turning the corner of London Circuit and Verity Lane, in Civic.” They have been very coy about providing the straightforward information that would establish which party was in breach of the road rules.

Special G 7:31 am 07 Nov 12

That intersection has clear visibility lines in both directions with no obstructions. It doesn’t really matter what speed the police car was traveling from the description of the incident the other car didn’t give way.

Grimm, with your obvious experience in collision reconstruction ACT Police have a job for you and if as you say the Police car was speeding and that caused the collision then you are justifying all the govt reasoning behind speed cameras.

Henry82 9:56 pm 06 Nov 12

Grimm said :

According to the CT article, the police car was “within the speed limit”.

That quotation alone makes me suspicious of the speed said vehicle was traveling.

thatsnotme 8:53 pm 06 Nov 12

Grimm said :

I drove right past it. Looked to me like the cop car was travelling down belco way towards Kippax, and the other car had come from the opposite direction and gone to turn right off belco way up to hawker shops. The damage on the other car was way too far back for it to have run over the front of the cop car. The damage to the drivers side of the cop car is also pretty horrible. Like I said, I t-boned a car who pulled out on me, and I was doing 80. Hit the other car in about the same spot the damage was on this one, and did nowhere near that much damage to my car. There’s no way in hell this happened at 60.

That’s it then, case closed! Book the police for speeding, and while you’re at it pay compensation to the other driver for failing to give way – it obviously wasn’t their fault, because of random internet precedents, and speculation, and probably science, or aliens.

[csi miami mode]

“there was a serious accident, and the police were involved”

“well, it looks like their morning took *puts on sunglasses* a turn for the worse”

YEEEAAAHHH!

[/csi miami mode]

Sandman 7:42 pm 06 Nov 12

astrojax said :

i agree with pork hunt [aghast!] – this is still journo doublespeak sh1t. whyn’t just say they presented at hospital later? does it matter how they got there? (and rational audiences would assume not by mabo if it was ‘later’) …

While we’re being pedantic,

“assume not by mabo”

Is that like, the vibe, of presenting at hospital?

vg 7:40 pm 06 Nov 12

cranky said :

Do they breath test the Police officer driver on the spot of the accident, as they do all other crash drivers?

No. Generally one cop hands another a brown paper bag full of cash and/ or coke so nothing happens and the whole incident is forgotten.

It’s also helpful as it allows the cop who crashed to get the body of the whistleblower out of the boot quickly and get back to the pub, where they can get hammered in uniform again and look for another innocent civilian to play demolition derby with.

That’s if they’ve got enough time after sleeping with all the local prossies.

Tetranitrate 6:24 pm 06 Nov 12

Grimm said :

According to the CT article, the police car was “within the speed limit”. I saw the damage to it, and there is no way on earth that happened at 60. My car didn’t look that bad after T-boning somebody at 80, and it’s the same model. Lets see how quick the CIRT team stop investigating this one, or the results are very well hidden.

Yeah but it wasn’t a T-bone collision, presuming that the cops were heading up belco way in the Kippax/Holt/Higgins direction, she must have been on belco way heading toward the city and turned off toward hawker shops without giving way – so *her* speed is very relevant. If she was travelling at 40 or so it’s quite possible that both cars were within the speed limit.
I mean it’s quite possible the cops were speeding but I don’t think there’s any particular reason to believe that they were given the limited information we have here.

LSWCHP 6:19 pm 06 Nov 12

bugmenot said :

Jungle Jim said :

Could be, if the police car was *breaking*

Ouch. The word you want is ‘braking’… http://www.thefreedictionary.com/braking

While you’re correct in one sense, it’s also self evident that the police car was indeed breaking. Just take a look at that pic…

cranky 5:58 pm 06 Nov 12

Do they breath test the Police officer driver on the spot of the accident, as they do all other crash drivers?

steele_blade 5:25 pm 06 Nov 12

Jungle Jim said :

bugmenot said :

Jungle Jim said :

Could be, if the police car was *breaking*

Ouch. The word you want is ‘braking’… http://www.thefreedictionary.com/braking

I concede that I didn’t proof my post adequately. Thanks for the lesson.

no, you were right, the police car is definitely broken.

ScienceRules 5:13 pm 06 Nov 12

astrojax said :

NoImRight said :

astrojax said :

ScienceRules said :

NoImRight said :

Pork Hunt said :

Self presented at hospital ? What, as opposed to doing it by proxy? Who writes this s***?

Perhaps as opposed to being taken by ambulance? Just a guess but thats how I read it.

Yep, that’s exactly what it means.

So your concern is adding the word “self” to the sentence? Thats too wordy now?

yes, i guess so – high falutin way of just saying ‘presented’, as if ‘self presented’ is somehow significant. this is the riot act – i’m obliged to be pedantic and picky and irate. now, just don’t start me on the journo predeliction for people – usually pollies – doing ‘backflips’ on issues!

It’s got nothing to do with being “high falutin”. These terms have some meaning within the emergency services and hospital system. BIBA (brought in by ambulance) suggests that the patient might have needed pre-hospital treatment.

“Presented” could mean that they came in with a relative or work colleague and therefore might have been significantly sick.

“Self-presented” suggests that they were well enough to make their own way in. None of this is proscriptive of course and “self presented” cases can drop dead at triage. Similarly the ambulance service spends an inordinate amount of time transporting whining, self-entitled idiots with nothing wrong with them.

It maybe you are worrying too much about semantics that really aren’t that significant to the story.

🙂

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site