Garda Crash Verdict

ballooba

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/03/28/story251451.html

Anyone else think this stinks?

The Garda had passed a 'Standard Garda Driving Test' i.e. She hadn't done and advanced driving course. She had also only been driving for a year and a half.

She claims not to have been doing more than 30mph. If you remember the photos from the time, the car managed to mount the curb and end up halfway up a bus stop with an old lady underneath.

I drive that road everyday and it is fairly obvious that you need to take it handy going around that bend. There is also perfectly adequate signage.

The car was probably a piece of shÍt and it evidently did have bald tyres.

Also the senior Garda saying that the gardai can request new tyres for their cars. I wonder what happens if they do that? Probably have to pay for them themselves.

Thankfully the gardai seem to have updated a lot of their fleet since this accident, hopefully that will go some way to improving the situation. Still doesn't make up for lack of training though.

Turner

ballooba wrote:

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/03/28/story251451.html

Thankfully the gardai seem to have updated a lot of their fleet since this accident, hopefully that will go some way to improving the situation. Still doesn't make up for lack of training though.

Are you joking. Most of the Garda fleet should be on the scrap heap.

Cars with over 200k on the clock being driven 24/7. Some cars without sirens or blue lights for months on end. Tyres regularly bald. Some cars without standard safety enahncements.

God even some dont have electric windows, central locking or alarms. All taken out to cut on expenses.

alias no.9

The gardai have a habbit of being able to buy cars of such a low spec, that you can't buy a similarly low spec'd car off a forecourt, in this, the land of poverty spec cars.

Calling the assessment done after completing the garda driver training course the "standard garda driving test" is probably technically correct but is entirely misleading. It suggests that there is a more advanced course that she should have completed when in fact the test she has completed is very stringent, with a high failure rate, and makes her more qualified to drive a patrol car than many gardai who regularly patrol cars with just their civillian license and the permission of their chief superintendant.

Finally, the verdict of the inquest was reached by a jury, 12 random punters (in case you didn't know, current and former members of the gardai and the judiciary are not eligible for jury duty), so in what way do you think this stinks?

kaizersoze

alias, I don't think the jury's verdict is in question and the victims family say they are happy with it and the recommendations they made.
The problem seems to be with the Garda investigation and the failure of the DPP to bring any charges.
For example,
1. The accident investigation was led by a guard from the drivers station.
2. The car wasn't up to scratch.
3. The lack of training the driver had received.
4. The contradictions between the drivers statements and the accident report. She said that she wasn't doing more 30mph but in the accident report it said that, following road tests at the scene, the car had to have been doing 70kph at least.
Therein lies the problem that most people have with the result.

ballooba

I saw Gardai on Aungier St on Friday night in a Volvo S40. I have seen them in other fairly decent cars too. They are few and far between but there seems to be a policy of buying new cars now. I'm sure the garda fleet must be in the thousands, so it would take a while to upgrade.

Pity we don't have the same lifecycle as the Ford Lincolns in the states.
Police Car -> Taxi -> Cheap First Car (for the image unconcious)

[edit] Also, beware of the speeds mentioned in the article, they use two scales. The garda says she was doing 30mph (50kmph~) and the expert says the safe speed for the corner was 70kmph (45mph~). [/edit]

kaizersoze

You're right about the speed ballooba. I should have put 70kph instead of 70mph. I'll fix that. Ta

ballooba

I'd still say she was well on the 70mph side of 70kmph though.

It looked like she was a fair bit past the corner by the time she crashed too.

maidhc

ballooba wrote:

I saw Gardai on Aungier St on Friday night in a Volvo S40. I have seen them in other fairly decent cars too. They are few and far between but there seems to be a policy of buying new cars now. I'm sure the garda fleet must be in the thousands, so it would take a while to upgrade.

Their cars aren't bad though. I know a good few are over 4 years old, but this shouldn't be a safety issue if they are properly maintained and driven safely.

ballooba wrote:

Pity we don't have the same lifecycle as the Ford Lincolns in the states.
Police Car -> Taxi -> Cheap First Car (for the image unconcious)

I'd love a bluesmobile.

Jip

Chief--- wrote:

God even some dont have electric windows, central locking
or alarms. All taken out to cut on expenses.

Why would a garda car need any of those things ?
If Garda cars started coming with climate control, leather and all the toys people would be complaining that it's a waste of tax payers money.

alias no.9

kaizersoze wrote:

alias, I don't think the jury's verdict is in question and the victims family say they are happy with it and the recommendations they made.
The problem seems to be with the Garda investigation and the failure of the DPP to bring any charges.
For example,
1. The accident investigation was led by a guard from the drivers station.

It's standard procedure for the local gardai to investigate accidents. Gardai often know the 'accused' in investigations, this isn't really any different. Should there be better protections against conflicts of interests? Certainly, but would there be outcry if the investigation of an accident, where the driver was not a garda, but may have some social or sporting connection with the garda leading the investigation, i.e. being members of the same golf club / gaa club / legion of mary / swingers club. Besides, the DPP often waits until after the verdict of an inquest to decide whether or not to press charges.

kaizersoze wrote:

2. The car wasn't up to scratch.

The car had been involved in two previous accidents and repaired. The tyre threads were low but not below the legal minimum. I'm all in favour of better equiping the gardai, but should they stop doing their job until the new cars come through?

kaizersoze wrote:

3. The lack of training the driver had received.

I've already dealt with this, the description of the 'standard garda driving test' is probably technically correct but extremely misleading, drawing parrallels with a standard civillian license and suggesting there is a more advanced test that gardai routinely go through that this garda hadn't done. The training done by gardai before the so called 'standard garda driving test' is in fact advanced driver training.

kaizersoze wrote:

4. The contradictions between the drivers statements and the accident report. She said that she wasn't doing more 30mph but in the accident report it said that, following road tests at the scene, the car had to have been doing 70kph at least.
Therein lies the problem that most people have with the result.

That is what the jury was there to deliberate on. That would probably form a substantial part of any criminal proceedings, where again a jury would deliberate on the evidence, which as a matter of fact was provided by a garda technical expert, refuting the notion that a proper garda investigation was not carried out. It is the DPP who has final say on pressing charges, and he obviously has this garda technical evidence.

It seems to me that some people go looking for things to get outraged about.

MercMad

It seems to me that some people go looking for things to get outraged about

I agree !

Wasn't there some talk of the mechanic having serviced the car 5,000 miles previously ! A lot can happen in that space of time, although it may only have been 2 to 3 weeks earlier ! Think of what those tyres would have been subjected to in that period !

I worked for an Opel Dealer and we serviced literally all the 2.0i Vectra cars. They did 10,000 miles per month and were fully serviced each month, sometimes they got brake pads in between too. These were Vectra auto's and were notoriously hard on front pads !

They had a deal with Semperit Irealnd and always had to go to the depot to get tyres. They could get them whenever they wanted but the car would be out of commision. It seemed strange that any tyre fitter could do the job while a customer waited but the garda depot couldn't!

Hence the crews were reluctant to bother with all that !

The cars were basically scrap after 100,000 miles !

There should be a tyre test after each shift, just train the drivers to reaslise its their own safety on the line if they dont figure out exactly how to do this !

Victor

alias no.9 wrote:

Finally, the verdict of the inquest was reached by a jury, 12 random punters (in case you didn't know, current and former members of the gardai and the judiciary are not eligible for jury duty), so in what way do you think this stinks?

No, coroners juries are picked by the investigating Garda, not from the register of electors.

I've met Andy Keegan twice (I used to live 100m from the crash site) and while he seems a decent bloke, I don't think anyone should be doing the investigating when the target of the investigation is someone one works with on a daily basis.