http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/news/2008/oct/22/mother-daughter-killed-cop-files-civil-suit/


THANK GOD THE FAMILY IS GONG TO TAKE THIS COP TO TASK. SHE WAS DRIVING LIKE A MANIAC.

NO SIREN.

SHE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.

OUR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY RAY MORROUGH 703-246-2776, let her slide and only had her charged for Reckless Driving.


God Bless the family.

The woman probably wouldn't have died if she had been wearing a seat-belt. Not sure what a jury would decide in a case like this. Yes, the officer caused the accident. But the woman's own actions resulted in her death.

WashingToneLocian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The woman probably wouldn't have died if she had
> been wearing a seat-belt. Not sure what a jury
> would decide in a case like this. Yes, the officer
> caused the accident. But the woman's own actions
> resulted in her death.


Virginia does retain contributory negligence as a complete defense to negligence. However, The VA seatbelt law, VA Code § 46.2-1094 D. states "A violation of this section shall not constitute negligence, be considered in mitigation of damages of whatever nature, be admissible in evidence or be the subject of comment by counsel in any action for the recovery of damages arising out of the operation, ownership, or maintenance of a motor vehicle, nor shall anything in this section change any existing law, rule, or procedure pertaining to any such civil action."

The jury should not even be made aware she wasn't wearing a seatbelt.

WashingToneLocian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The woman probably wouldn't have died if she had
> been wearing a seat-belt. Not sure what a jury
> would decide in a case like this. Yes, the officer
> caused the accident. But the woman's own actions
> resulted in her death.


right and shooting victims are at fault for not wearing bulletproof vests dummy

hah but I am more surprised that there are people her age that don't wear a seatbelt all the time. I'm not too far away from the victim's (that is, the teacher WashTonLoc) age and I can't drive without a seatbelt. The feeling is just to weird... almost a sick feeling if the seatbelt isn't on.

Law Dog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingToneLocian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The woman probably wouldn't have died if she
> had
> > been wearing a seat-belt. Not sure what a jury
> > would decide in a case like this. Yes, the
> officer
> > caused the accident. But the woman's own
> actions
> > resulted in her death.
>
>
> Virginia does retain contributory negligence as a
> complete defense to negligence. However, The VA
> seatbelt law, VA Code § 46.2-1094 D. states "A
> violation of this section shall not constitute
> negligence, be considered in mitigation of damages
> of whatever nature, be admissible in evidence or
> be the subject of comment by counsel in any action
> for the recovery of damages arising out of the
> operation, ownership, or maintenance of a motor
> vehicle, nor shall anything in this section change
> any existing law, rule, or procedure pertaining to
> any such civil action."
>
> The jury should not even be made aware she wasn't
> wearing a seatbelt.


Thanks for the clarification.

lol Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingToneLocian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The woman probably wouldn't have died if she
> had
> > been wearing a seat-belt. Not sure what a jury
> > would decide in a case like this. Yes, the
> officer
> > caused the accident. But the woman's own
> actions
> > resulted in her death.
>
>
> right and shooting victims are at fault for not
> wearing bulletproof vests dummy

It's obviously been an issue in the past, given that the state has specific language in the law about it.

lol Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> right and shooting victims are at fault for not
> wearing bulletproof vests dummy

if you go to a place where it is known random bullets will be flying around, like on a hunting trip with Dick Cheney, you need to wear a bullet proof vest. Otherwise, you don't need one.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2008 04:06PM by FUNdamental.

Questions:


(1)
in this day and age, why would anyone drive or ride in a motor vehicle without
wearing seatbelts? (in both front and rear seats) or did the seatbelt buckle
fail, resulting in the victim being ejected from the vehicle, as has happened
in other vehicles manufacturered by Toyota Motor Manufacturing North America(TMMNA)?

(2)
why isn't the mother suing Fairfax County?(and/or Fairfax County Police Dept)
officer Perry was clearly on-duty at time of this unfortunate crime

(3) officer Perry claimed that she switched on the sirens but there was
no sound. did anyone investigate if there as equipment failure? if so, why
isn't anyone(the victim's mother or the FCPD) suing the siren manufacturer or
installer

(4) at this intersecion, wasn't there a in-store security camera? if so, was the tape and/or hard drive retrieved as evidence?

HOORAY Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/news/2008/oct/22/mothe
> r-daughter-killed-cop-files-civil-suit/
>
>
> THANK GOD THE FAMILY IS GONG TO TAKE THIS COP TO
> TASK. SHE WAS DRIVING LIKE A MANIAC.
>
> NO SIREN.
>
> SHE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER.
>
> OUR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY RAY MORROUGH
> 703-246-2776, let her slide and only had her
> charged for Reckless Driving.
>
>
> God Bless the family.


You need some serious help!!

.
Attachments:

Why is you're title "COP WHO KILLED TEACHER GETTING SUED" and you're name is "HOORAY"?

Fuck off dude. The police officer did not mean any of this to happen. Part of her job is to help people and she was in a hurry to help someone out. So shut the fuck up about this. It is a tragic event, but why are they still trying to punish the officer as if they are seeking revenge? Yes she killed the driver, but before crossing an intersection you must look all ways before crossing, for government vehicles. The family is in seek of revenge of the officer due to the sudden loss of their loved ones. This case should be looked at a later date so the family will think before they try to sue. They are seeking revenge from the wrong person for the wrong reasons. Suing the officer is not the answer and it will not bring their family member back who was killed in the accident.

Firrat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why is you're title "COP WHO KILLED TEACHER
> GETTING SUED" and you're name is "HOORAY"?
>
> Fuck off dude. The police officer did not mean
> any of this to happen. Part of her job is to help
> people and she was in a hurry to help someone out.
> So shut the fuck up about this. It is a tragic
> event, but why are they still trying to punish the
> officer as if they are seeking revenge? Yes she
> killed the driver, but before crossing an
> intersection you must look all ways before
> crossing, for government vehicles. The family is
> in seek of revenge of the officer due to the
> sudden loss of their loved ones. This case should
> be looked at a later date so the family will think
> before they try to sue. They are seeking revenge
> from the wrong person for the wrong reasons.
> Suing the officer is not the answer and it will
> not bring their family member back who was killed
> in the accident.



Yeah but money always makes things better for some reason... especially millions and millions of dollars... isnt that funny though, money doesnt start making you feel better til you get into the 100's of thousands and couple of millions. I predict once this lawsuit is over and theyve collected, the family will magically now find solace and peace with this situation...

doesn't anyone see that the OP as Colleen?

maybe if she had her sirens or even her lights on while running a red light speeding into oncomming traffic then I would think she does not deserve to be held accountable for her actions. I know if I was in her situation i would definately do that Woop Woop then proceed

Virginia is a contributory state. Ashley's actions contributed to her death and not just the lack of a seatbelt. Her death is a trajedy but her family won't see a dime.

From what I heard she had her lights on, but her sirens stopped working.

The cop who killed Ahsley is trained and better understands that she put everyone's life on the line here.

When you break the speed limit, you waive your rights, even contrib negligence.

The cops are here to help. But there is also a level of arrogance and the feeling that "we are above the law" with many cops and prosecutors in Fairfax.

Ever heard of Ray Brownell? He was a former prosecutor who was charged and/or convicted with DUI, and possibly other charges. Did anything happen to him?

WHY ARE YOU YELLING AT US!!! CAPS LOCK BROKEN???!

LMSO

LMAO

Ashley was speeding?

Then I might have to withdraw my comments

Common CENT$ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Yeah but money always makes things better for some
> reason... especially millions and millions of
> dollars... isnt that funny though, money doesnt
> start making you feel better til you get into the
> 100's of thousands and couple of millions. I
> predict once this lawsuit is over and theyve
> collected, the family will magically now find
> solace and peace with this situation...


I hope the family prevails in their lawsuit, even though it is all of us (taxpayers) that will pay the judgement.

Money is the only way to change FCPD's procedures. They don't care a bit that they killed this girl...but they will care if they can't buy some new toys because of having to pay this family a few million.

They just might prohibit officers from driving like Perry did with a broken siren.....let another unit respond. Especially on a fucking shoplifting call.

You might think the family is profiteering...but they are persuing the only justice they are going to get...the cop already walked on the reckless charge.

I hope the family costs FCPD enough to make them never do it again!

"Make them change their procedures?" What the hell do you know about their procedures? And what do you do when you're driving and spill your orange slurpee and cheetos on the dashboard and short out the lights? Do you pull over and stop? I doubt it. Probably just continue on to the comic book store and damned if anyone gets in your way.

Seriously you monday morning QBs out there who think you know jack crap about Virginia law and bitch and moan about why she was only charged with reckless should maybe read a code book. Virginia law only allows a vehicular manslaughter charge where the operator acted with malice and/or was under the influence. Neither occurred here. So reckless is the only way to go, and under the general statute requires that the officer was driving in a reckless and indifferent manner to public safety. She was driving with her lights and (arguably) siren on. This is not reckless. It's sad what happened, but that's just what it is, sad. Suing her won't bring their daughter back, and only shows they care about money, not anything else. Frankly it's pathetic, but not anymore pathetic that some loser getting his jollies because a cop got sued for doing her job. Honestly I hope your fatass gets your house broken into by some maniac and gets to beg a cop for help. If they read your postings, hopefully they would let you just die except they wouldn't because they are better than you. Go stick your face back in your nacho cheese dip and shut your pie hole fat boy. Realize you live under the very blanket of 24/7 protection these officers provide your fat butt every day. They don't expect you to thank them, but sitting there in your size 58 dungarees and questioning them is laughable to say the least.

Oh and what do you know about paying taxes? There's no chance you pay taxes on your paper route and 7-11 hot dog jockey jobs. Don't kid yourself you don't pay their salaries.

tubby Wrote:
>>> I hope the family costs FCPD enough to make them never do it again!

+1

This incompetent fool killed a person for no reason. And then she walked on the charge because she was "law enforcement". Fuck that. I don't care how tough or "thankless" police jobs are; broadsiding a car at a high speed is reckless. They are not above the law. They should be punished like anyone else. Anybody who thinks otherwise is a fucking sell-out and a coward.

Give that family the money they are owed. It won't bring her back, but it will damn sure make the cops re-think their training and procedures. And maybe bring a modicum of comfort to the family who lost a daughter because of reckless, unnecessary police action.

People need to stop acting like such fucking pussies when it come to this kind of abuse.

I think what everyone is missing here (including the newspapers & the family in the interviews) is that you still have to stop for a red light, it doesn't matter if you had your siren & lights on or not. You can't just bust a red light.

fd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Virginia is a contributory state. Ashley's actions
> contributed to her death and not just the lack of
> a seatbelt. Her death is a tragedy but her family
> won't see a dime.

Yup absolutely correct, plus there's going to be some things that will come out in the civil trial that will show by a preponderance of evidence that the decedent was more culpable for the crash. But hey, why let the facts get in the way? The media sure doesn't, makes the story less juicy and sensationalist.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> tubby Wrote:
> >>> I hope the family costs FCPD enough to make
> them never do it again!
>
> +1

+2, but you know they will do it again.


> This incompetent fool killed a person for no
> reason. And then she walked on the charge because
> she was "law enforcement". Fuck that. I don't
> care how tough or "thankless" police jobs are;
> broadsiding a car at a high speed is reckless.
> They are not above the law. They should be
> punished like anyone else.

exactly, being a sysadmin is a thankless job but you dont see admins getting off scott-free for hacking into people's computers.


> Give that family the money they are owed. It
> won't bring her back, but it will damn sure make
> the cops re-think their training and procedures.
> And maybe bring a modicum of comfort to the family
> who lost a daughter because of reckless,
> unnecessary police action.

hopefully they will send a some cops back through training.

---

the FCPD and FC legal system needs to be gutted and rebuilt with honest people instead of the mockery of justice that is currently in place.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

pgens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .


Sorry but under the REAL law, the officer should be stoned to death. She deserves to be sued and then sold as a slave to pay the debt. She killed someone ! Of course the Fairfax County police are improving ! This time the murdered citizen wasn't handcuffed and shot like a eye doctor.

Funions420 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fd Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Virginia is a contributory state. Ashley's
> actions
> > contributed to her death and not just the lack
> of
> > a seatbelt. Her death is a tragedy but her
> family
> > won't see a dime.
>
> Yup absolutely correct, plus there's going to be
> some things that will come out in the civil trial
> that will show by a preponderance of evidence that
> the decedent was more culpable for the crash. But
> hey, why let the facts get in the way? The media
> sure doesn't, makes the story less juicy and
> sensationalist.

Violating Virginia seat belt law is not contributory negligence, as a simple matter of law. Read the Virginia seat belt law quoted above. A violation of the seat belt law is specifically exempted from contributory negligence. The family will recover, as they should.

Nice try at shifting the blame, PIG.

Believe only half of what you see and none of what you read. There's several more contributory factors that cannot be discussed here. The truth will come out in court, but will be relegated to page 45 I'm sure.

Everyone is forgetting. The cop was speeding like a maniac in the middle of a bad ice storm. Why? To stop a fight one mile down the road between a group of kids who were just acting like dipshi*s. The officer is 22 years old so I am sure youth was a factor too, that and FFX County Cops are kinda dicks. Always around when you're going 30 in a 25, never around when a old lady is getting mugged in a parking lot. I hope the family get's everything!

Gravis the difference between a sysadmin hacking a system and this situation is intent. I am sure this is difficult for you to understand but this was an accident.
Wrong!: I guess reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. My post said that Ashley contributed to the accident beyond not wearing her seatbelt. Perhaps everyone needs to read the articles written after the criminal trial, not just the articles written after the accident.
The point is this is a terrible trajedy, there was no intent to cause anyone harm, both sides contributed to the results, and the family will not see a dime.

fd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gravis the difference between a sysadmin hacking a

> The point is this is a terrible trajedy, there was
> no intent to cause anyone harm, both sides
> contributed to the results, and the family will
> not see a dime.

Pet peeve. There's no "j" in "tragedy." (How'd high school go for you?)

Ya bunch of bullshit if you ask me.. I remember them not handing over the dashboard cameras and stuff. That would have exonerated the police officer if the lights/sirens were really on, or that she attempted to put them on.

It really is a conspiracy

I see cops throw on their lights but not use their sirens to go through intersections all of the time. Is this approved practice by the Department? Does this comply with State Law? If so, the policy may need to be changed, but I'm not sure the family will recover anything if Virginia Law allows this.

At the civil trial, Fairfax County will show that Ashley McIntosh was turning toward an IHOP, where it was uncertain whether she would pay for pancakes.

"I think what everyone is missing here (including the newspapers & the family in the interviews) is that you still have to stop for a red light, it doesn't matter if you had your siren & lights on or not. You can't just bust a red light."

Here is the state code that applies to police vehicles "running code". Educate yourself before you type a bunch of BS.


§ 46.2-920. Certain vehicles exempt from regulations in certain situations; exceptions and additional requirements.

A. The driver of any emergency vehicle, when such vehicle is being used in the performance of public services, and when such vehicle is operated under emergency conditions, may, without subjecting himself to criminal prosecution:

1. Disregard speed limits, while having due regard for safety of persons and property;

2. Proceed past any steady or flashing red signal, traffic light, stop sign, or device indicating moving traffic shall stop if the speed of the vehicle is sufficiently reduced to enable it to pass a signal, traffic light, or device with due regard to the safety of persons and property;

3. Park or stop notwithstanding the other provisions of this chapter;

4. Disregard regulations governing a direction of movement of vehicles turning in specified directions so long as the operator does not endanger life or property;

5. Pass or overtake, with due regard to the safety of persons and property, another vehicle at any intersection;

6. Pass or overtake with due regard to the safety of persons and property, while en route to an emergency, stopped or slow-moving vehicles, by going to the left of the stopped or slow-moving vehicle either in a no-passing zone or by crossing the highway centerline; or

7. Pass or overtake with due regard to the safety of persons and property, while en route to an emergency, stopped or slow-moving vehicles, by going off the paved or main traveled portion of the roadway on the right. Notwithstanding other provisions of this section, vehicles exempted in this instance will not be required to sound a siren or any device to give automatically intermittent signals.

What's your point? Thanks for proving mine. Or does your computer not allow you to see the words "due regard". Where does it say in your post that someone can blow a light at full speed???...I must have missed it. Bozo.

you all are idiots Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I think what everyone is missing here (including
> the newspapers & the family in the interviews) is
> that you still have to stop for a red light, it
> doesn't matter if you had your siren & lights on
> or not. You can't just bust a red light."
>
> Here is the state code that applies to police
> vehicles "running code". Educate yourself before
> you type a bunch of BS.
>
>
> § 46.2-920. Certain vehicles exempt from
> regulations in certain situations; exceptions and
> additional requirements.
>
> A. The driver of any emergency vehicle, when such
> vehicle is being used in the performance of public
> services, and when such vehicle is operated under
> emergency conditions, may, without subjecting
> himself to criminal prosecution:
>
> 1. Disregard speed limits, while having due regard
> for safety of persons and property;
>
> 2. Proceed past any steady or flashing red signal,
> traffic light, stop sign, or device indicating
> moving traffic shall stop if the speed of the
> vehicle is sufficiently reduced to enable it to
> pass a signal, traffic light, or device with due
> regard to the safety of persons and property;
>
> 3. Park or stop notwithstanding the other
> provisions of this chapter;
>
> 4. Disregard regulations governing a direction of
> movement of vehicles turning in specified
> directions so long as the operator does not
> endanger life or property;
>
> 5. Pass or overtake, with due regard to the safety
> of persons and property, another vehicle at any
> intersection;
>
> 6. Pass or overtake with due regard to the safety
> of persons and property, while en route to an
> emergency, stopped or slow-moving vehicles, by
> going to the left of the stopped or slow-moving
> vehicle either in a no-passing zone or by crossing
> the highway centerline; or
>
> 7. Pass or overtake with due regard to the safety
> of persons and property, while en route to an
> emergency, stopped or slow-moving vehicles, by
> going off the paved or main traveled portion of
> the roadway on the right. Notwithstanding other
> provisions of this section, vehicles exempted in
> this instance will not be required to sound a
> siren or any device to give automatically
> intermittent signals.