How Many Mistakes Is This Officer Making?

[rmoore]

You arrive as a fire department responder to what was reported as a 'major'; a vehicle crash with reported injuries.

As you pull up on the inside shoulder (left shoulder), this is what you see.

The officer's patrol car is parked along the shoulder ahead of the crash-damaged Explorer.

In just this one 'snapshot in time', how many wrong (meaning unsafe or risky) things do you see? Let's see you list...

[ChiefKN]

No safety vest

Parked upstream

He's not heads up, he's writing standing out there in no-mans land

[drerict]

He is also blinded to the on coming vehicles being on that side of the explorer

[ff900]

I agree with the two reason ChiefKN posted. I think they are both too close to the Explorer which is only a few feet from an open lane of traffic. There is no protection from the opposite side of the highway which the officer's back is turned to.

When we are out on the roads we needs eye in the back of our heads!

[CanadianFyrTrks]

Is there a fuel leak? If so, Mister officer is sitting in a puddle of combustibles

[nmfire]

The barrierless median I really don't see as an issue here in these conditions. If it was snowing or icy, I would be more worried, but lets be realistic in our safety hats. The traffic on the other side in clear dry weather is not any more of a risk than a comet striking the scene. So I'm ignoring that aspect.

- Cruiser not being used as a barrier and warning device. The cruiser should be parked upstream and pointed such that it would be pushed into the grass on rear impact. It is useless where parked.

- The guy has to write things down. It is his job. You can't fault him for doing paperwork. I would face upsteam so I can always see oncoming traffic when my head isn't down writing. But for all I know, he just turned to look at a dent. He is standing in the safest place possible to begin with already (see my next point)

- He is standing well off the travel and shoulder of the road. There is no safer place to stand and frankly, that is right where I would be too. I would ask her to step further over to the middle as well. But really, she is well out of the way too. What more can you do? Wear jetpacks and hover? You have to be there. She has to be there.

- No there is no fuel leak. I give both the officer and the woman standing there the benefit of being intelligent people that would not stand in a pool of gasoline. That should not even be a factor.

- I do not know what their policy is on vests, or if they are even issued them so I can't pass judgement on it. Would I wear one, yes. But I can't call it a mistake on the officer's part.

So to answer the question, the only mistake I see is the positioning of his cruiser. Everything else appears to be as good as it is going to get given the location of the incident.

[Resq14]

How many mistakes is this officer making?

One.

He didn't turf a crash report call to a rookie.

[mcwops]

- I do not know what their policy is on vests, or if they are even issued them so I can't pass judgement on it. Would I wear one, yes. But I can't call it a mistake on the officer's part.

Federal law, you have to wear a vest on a federally funded highway.

And I would have to agree, what good is a pretty lightbar and arrowstick on his cruiser, if it is parked on the otherside of the accident vehicle?

I'm curious, this was dispatched as a "with injury". Where is the injured party?

[nmfire]

Federal law, you have to wear a vest on a federally funded highway.

I know. That doesn't mean his department is in compliance with that law and requires their officers to wear them. It doesn't mean he was given a vest to wear. So I can not call it a mistake without knowing if it is or not.

I'm curious, this was dispatched as a "with injury". Where is the injured party?

85% of the motoring public armed with cell phones are clueless idiots. You wouldn't believe the things people call in and report. This kind of thing is very common. The 911 calls probably ranged from a disabled vehicle to a plane crash.

[SARSpecialist]

A few things...

OK... this is just a snap shot... one picture of a very small area...but given that I will say I agree with the fact that he fails to wear a vest, and his vehicle is parked up stream (do we know who took this pic).. if not can we be assured there was not another "blocking" vehicle out of this pic??? other than that i cant see to many other things wrong.. Now granted there is no such thing as a routine call, based on this snap shot this seems to be a quick report accident and the vehicle from what I can see and my 20+ years as a Police Officer tells me its a driveable vehicle.. based on this picture... get a few pieces of info for a incident report and hand them a Blue Form.. 10-8... Hard to judge, We get bad call info all the time... and we all have been sent to that "MAJOR with entrapment to find a fender bender... We all make mistakes, we hope we live to learn from them, but I certainly can see all sides to the coin.. as Fire and Police

[BFDFirefighter418]

mva

1. police car a head of crash

but ya there a lote of mistakes in the pic

[nmfire]

but ya there a lot of mistakes in the pic

Well, don't hold back. Please enlighten us. What mistakes is the officer making.

[Trifecta]

In general, an officer parks behind the wreck. For all we know, this wreck was reported by the officer when he rolled up on it. If there was traffic and he was in the right lane, it is possible he was past the wreck before he could safely get over.

The officer is only a few feet from the exact middle of the median, putting him just about as far as possible from traffic. I think I might move down stream a bit, taking advantage of the blocking provided by the victims vehicle and maybe far enough down to be in front of the police vehicle. That won't protect me from a comet(laughed at that one) or an idiot coming the other way but it's the best you can do. Eventually, the officer will need to be at the vehicle to complete his report, but might have been able to wait for a cover unit or a fire engine to create a margin of safety.

I am also with SARS above in moving the whole thing to a service road if the vehicle is drivable and the driver is uninjured.

Should he wear a safety vest? Sure. Do I always wear one? Yep. Do I think it would increase safety in that situation, in that location. Nope, not a bit. If somebody is driving in the grass, that vest isn't going to make one bit of difference.

[ChiefKN]

Do I think it would increase safety in that situation, in that location. Nope, not a bit. If somebody is driving in the grass, that vest isn't going to make one bit of difference.

I don't see his cape, so he must have walked at some point to that spot from his car parked on the roadway.

[Nozzle nut 22]

Being a picture, it's impossible to say what is happening outside the frame, so I have to go with what was given. That said, I agree with those who said the cruiser should be behind the vehicle.

however, as I drive for a living, I fully agree that it's entirely possible that the leo COULDN'T get over there in time to pull in behind the wreck. Rather than trying to back into traffic and around the car, or baja thru the median, he chose to stick with it. I'm here to tell ya- the roads are full of clueless, selfish bastards who won't give ANYONE the time of day... It's all " ME FIRST!!!"

I'm not real bothered by where they're standing either. There's only so far you can go before you're on the other shoulder, and any farther downstream, and they're invisible to traffic in one direction. Knowing how stupid people drive, I would NOT get between the vehicles under any circumstances. At highway speed, they'd wear that suv...

The jet pack and comet comments were classic!

Not a shot at the OP, but just for once, how about we look for- and acknowlege- what is being done right, and not focus on catching others doing wrong?? It seems we firefighters, as a group, are often utterly focused on the negative- picking stuff apart, and criticizing every little thing. It's not this board in particular, either- it's everywhere. How many nasty hyper critical letters to the editor do we read in the trade journals BLASTING somebody over a cover shot, or article photo? Better yet, have you read the complete rubbish that is the comments section on most fire related youtube videos? No wonder so many disable comments... Makes me wonder what the public thinks of us after reading some of that crap. Alright, off my soapbox...

One question, what did she hit, and where is the other vehicle ( if there was one)?