Trooper leaves scene of crash, allows victim to burn.

[Guest President Fernatt]

I looked around and searched for a while on this but couldn't find any posts about it. Please remove it if it is a duplicate.

Tennessee Trooper pursues suspect, ignores suspect when he crashes...then allows the victim to burn. Please read article before commenting.

THP: Trooper saw fatal crash but "chose to ignore it" | wbir.com

I completely support Law Enforcement and in no way intend for this to turn into cop bashing. First Responders are incredible folks but it seems this trooper is the "bad apple" in the bunch.

Edited February 2, 2012 by President Fernatt

[Guest bkelm18]

Saw that on KnoxNews. Seems he was also involved in another fatal chase not too long ago.

[TNFF319]

ugh ohh

[Guest NYCrulesU]

Anyone that knows me knows I rarely, if ever, defend LE. I don't see that the THP officer did anything wrong. Hard to prove he saw the wreck when it happened and just drove down the road and chilled. Absurd thinking.

More probable that he didn't see the wreck and simply though he lost the subject. Thus he called of the pursuit...as heard in the video. Then, when the accident was dispatched, he sped vack to the scene and attempted to extinguish the fire....and even at personal risk he twice tried to get back to the drivers door.

A lawsuit and possibly being fired is ridiculous. For his superior to say he agrees with the victims parents is assinine.

[Sandman]

When I watched the video, I didn't see the wreck at first. I had to rewind it. So maybe...

[Guest lostpass]

Anyone that knows me knows I rarely, if ever, defend LE. I don't see that the THP officer did anything wrong. Hard to prove he saw the wreck when it happened and just drove down the road and chilled. Absurd thinking.

More probable that he didn't see the wreck and simply though he lost the subject. Thus he called of the pursuit...as heard in the video. Then, when the accident was dispatched, he sped vack to the scene and attempted to extinguish the fire....and even at personal risk he twice tried to get back to the drivers door.

A lawsuit and possibly being fired is ridiculous. For his superior to say he agrees with the victims parents is assinine.

I don't know, it looked pretty bad to me. My eyes saw it like this:

Trooper chasing a guy for speeding. This is the first problem. You really shouldn't chase someone for speeding if they are that far away. That is dangerous for the trooper and the guy being chased. They'll speed again and get caught. High speed pursuit should be saved for when a more serious crime is suspected.

So he chases the guy and the dude crashes. I could see the car in the video and the video is not exactly HD. So I bet the trooper saw it. He drives by the crash and says he is terminating the pursuit. Great, I would suspect this is some CYA stuff. If he didn't see the crash why is he terminating the pursuit?

Then he gets out and does a weird fire extinguisher thing. Shooting into the air instead of at the base of the flames.

Here's what I suspect, without any real evidence, happened. Trooper starts chasing a guy cause driving fast is fun. Car wrecks. Trooper knows that he'll get blamed for the wreck. Trooper tries to mitigate damage. Trooper returns to the scene, guy is dead, lets car burn in case guy would've been helped by immediate intervention.

But that is just a guess. All my dealings with TN troopers and KPD and KCSD have been really good. I'm not saying this guy was a bad trooper or anything, more like an unfortunate series of events. But we should hold public officials accountable when stuff like this happens. Those folks have a lot of power and it is crucial that they realize that their power has consequences and limits.

[Guest bkelm18]

THP: Trooper deliberately drove past fatal wreck after chase » Knoxville News Sentinel

Investigators are saying that there's no possible way he could've missed that wreck. His version of events do not match those on the video. He contacted a lawyer immediately after this incident. Doesn't sound good for the trooper.

[TMF]

Here's what I suspect, without any real evidence, happened. Trooper starts chasing a guy cause driving fast is fun. Car wrecks. Trooper knows that he'll get blamed for the wreck. Trooper tries to mitigate damage. Trooper returns to the scene, guy is dead, lets car burn in case guy would've been helped by immediate intervention.

I would say that's a pretty good guess. I don't think the outcome would have been different if he had stopped, but clearly this displays a BIG problem, and if it's true he shouldn't be wearing a badge anymore. The DA cleared him a while back, which I assume is because the medical examiner determined the speeder died on impact.

As far as the officer giving chase, well I hate the idea of armchair quarterbacking that stuff. Leaving it to the discretion of the officer I think is best. I remember a case down in Florida about 10 years ago where a woman was carjacked/kidnapped. The criminal was spotted speeding in the interstate by FHP and the officer chased. At the time the vehicle wasn't reported stolen or the woman missing yet. The criminal fled and the Trooper disengaged because it was their policy not to chase speeders. It was later determined that she was still alive inside the vehicle at the time. The criminal later murdered her. Leaving it in the hands of the officer to make that decision whether or not to chase is the best way, in my opinion.

[MattCary]

As a former First Responder, I'll throw my two cents in here:

First time through, I didn't see the wreck. When the camera topped the hill, I was looking for tail lamps. I saw the cross street and wondered if the speeder had turned down it. When the trooper slowed down at the cross street, I thought he was looking for tail lights to see if the car went that way, didn't see any, then hit it to keep going straight. I had to back the video up to see if I had missed the wreck. Lights in the yard and the head lights and emergency lights reflecting off the sign just before the accident would make it difficult to see just after.

I can tell you from experience (Rescue, Fire and 911 Dispatch) that when you are driving Code 3 you have tunnel vision, focused on the road, cross streets, other traffic, braking, etc. not to mention adrenaline pumping. Anything that isn't on the road or has potential to cross your path can easily be missed. I've seen many single car accidents where the first vehicle on scene has trouble locating the accident, and we knew where it was and what we were looking for; we weren't in a high speed pursuit. The trooper was looking for a speeding/fleeing vehicle, not an MVA.

So, everything up to him coming back to the scene makes sense to me, including him not seeing the wreck.

I don't know how much fire training THP gets, but that is *not* how you put out a fire. (This could be an unfair assessment, as I am trained in Firefighting; it's second nature to me.) To be fair, having been on scene of many fatal accidents; he could very easily have seen that the driver was obviously deceased (DRT,) and that was why he was keeping everyone else back from the fire, keeping anyone else from being injured.

That's just my feelings on the video. Anything stupid the Trooper did or said afterwards is outside the realm of my experience, as I have never been a LEO. Also: none of my experience as a First Responder involved a camera and a mic recording everything I did and said, and that is a probably a big factor in this case. I never had to worry about how anything looked or sounded to the outside world in retrospect.

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

I am one who has the utmost respect for any of our LEO and would give them the benefit of the doubt every time. But while I agree with the Trooper not being criminally charged I also agree that he should be fired.

Personally I find it hard to believe that he did not see the wreck the first time that he went by it and given that he did slow down so much when he went by, I just dont buy that he missed it. Although I will concede that he could have. Not likely IMO but possible.

But then there is also the issue of his past record that shows that he was not doing something right, that record, to me speaks louder than the incident in question and of course makes the incident itself more questionable. If the man had no such record I dont think that he would be getting fired or sued.

His record shows that he was written up a total of 14 times with 7 of those times in the past 2 years alone. Why there was "No action taken" on most of them I do not know but I find it hard to believe that a person would be written up that many times and not have been doing something wrong. He was written up each of the first three months of 2010. It is hard to say for certain not knowing all of the facts but had I been his boss I believe that he would have been shown the door at that point.

I dont know what it is, but IMO something else was going on with this guy. He either has a medical issue, some non work related stress going on or possibly even job burn-out. I did not notice anywhere in the article where it said just how long the man had been on the job but burn-out does occur in such a high pressure job. His previous record shows me that he has already been given the benefit of the doubt several times.

I do not give any weight in the matter to the comments made after the fact about putting on a show for the media as I feel that even the most innocent of persons could possibly make that statement in a normal conversation after such an event in which they did know that the driver was already deceased. That comment is one in which the context in which it was used has everything to do with it. It may seem unprofessional and flippant to some of us but we do not know just how the comment was used.

But I would not be surprised if that comment had a lot to do with a lawyer taking the case. I am sorry for the family's loss but I dont think that they can prove any more to a jury than we can all sit here and prove from the story and video ourselves. I do however think that his comment will carry some weight in front of that jury, the lawyer will probably try to claim that it was some sort of an admission of guilt.

I thank the Trooper for his years of sacrifice and service to our state but feel it is time for him to move on.

[Guest Bang!]

The father was on the radio this morning. He says the car was not on fire when the trooper passed. it. The trooper slowed down past the accident at aprox. 20 mph. The trooper said that he used fire extinguisher (when he returned) to satisfy the media. These are all facts. Here is a recent news report from WBIR. Bystander remembers Anito car crash | wbir.com

[Guest President Fernatt]

The trooper is going to get fired...that's pretty much a given. I'm just curious about that 10 million dollar lawsuit. I don't think it has any chance! The guy died on impact so nothing the trooper could have done would change that. Granted, the trooper didn't know that but when it comes down to it there is no way the family can say that the trooper's actions caused the death of the driver. The driver caused his own death and that is something the family will have to live with. Something they shouldn't live with though is 10 million bucks.

The family is wrong in filing a money hungry suit based on the trooper's failure in saving the kid's life and leaving the scene of the wreck. The trooper was wrong, not for chasing or being involved in a fatal pursuit, but for not at least attempting to render aid.

Edited February 2, 2012 by President Fernatt

[Smith]

The trooper is going to get fired...that's pretty much a given. I'm just curious about that 10 million dollar lawsuit. I don't think it has any chance! The guy died on impact so nothing the trooper could have done would change that. Granted, the trooper didn't know that but when it comes down to it there is no way the family can say that the trooper's actions caused the death of the driver. The driver caused his own death and that is something the family will have to live with. Something they shouldn't live with though is 10 million bucks.

The family is wrong in filing a money hungry suit based on the trooper's failure in saving the kid's life and leaving the scene of the wreck. The trooper was wrong, not for chasing or being involved in a fatal pursuit, but for not at least attempting to render aid.

IIRC by law, LE have no duty to protect or render aid so I don't see much happening in that regard. However, our judicial system will probably rule against him anyway. That being said, he will and should be fired.

As to the kid, it's a good lesson for these youngsters who think they are immortal. All he had to do was stop. If it was only speeding no big deal If there was something else he was hiding ..... Good thing he only killed himself and not somebody else which is usually the case.

[Guest db99wj]

I don't see the wreck still. At what time is it visible? Which side of the road?

[leroy]

Been watchin this a bit. I think there are two crimes here. The first is the kid that wuz doin 80+ at 3:30 in the mornin on a state highway that was, in fact, actually endangering innocent drivers. Therefore he was, in fact, committing a crime. The second is that the parents of this unfortunate young person dont seem to see their child committing this crime this as a problem and are seeking to punish someone for "not giving sufficient aid" or "somehow caring enough". I would be a bit more disposed to sympathy here if there were actually some adults and some adult thinking here.

I can understand the grieving parent thing; i cant understand or accept the thinking that somehow the kid who killed himself and endangered a bunch of innocent people in the process is somehow exonerated and made an innocent as the result of runnin into a tree while drivin too fast, while folks who are actually sworn to uphold the law are being vilified. I will grant that we can quibble a bit about "the giving of adequate aid", but not the role of LE in this situation. I'm amazed at the overlooking off the "real crime" here and the focusing on the actions of LE. We are nothin but a bunch of armchair quarterbacks when we start opinin on how much aid is enough; we werent there.

Only a dammed bunch of tort lawyers with no conscience and a bunch of grief filled parents who have denied their kids faults and wrongdoing could come up this sad story. It's the world turned upside down, man. Denying the truth is a dangerous thing. It turns traditionally "right actions" into "wrong actions" and endangers us all.

leroy

[TMF]

I can understand the grieving parent thing; i cant understand or accept the thinking that somehow the kid who killed himself and endangered a bunch of innocent people in the process is somehow exonerated and made an innocent as the result of runnin into a tree while drivin too fast, while folks who are actually sworn to uphold the law are being vilified. I will grant that we can quibble a bit about "the giving of adequate aid", but not the role of LE in this situation. I'm amazed at the overlooking off the "real crime" here and the focusing on the actions of LE. We are nothin but a bunch of armchair quarterbacks when we start opinin on how much aid is enough; we werent there.

leroy

Well the officer is being villified because of his supposed wrongful actions. I don't think it's possible for anyone outside of the investigation to determine with a degree of certainty that he did something wrong, but if he did it was really, really wrong and unbecoming.

With that said, the 20 year old that decided to run from him has already been served a self-inflicted punishment and left his parents a BBQ'd corpse. I don't think anyone here believes that he wasn't do something worthy of being chased and thrown in jail. His parents should be looking at what a poor job they did raising him instead of pointing fingers at the officer... he woulda been dead either way.

[daddyo]

This is exactly why I carry for my protection and the protection of my family and no one else.

We are a litigation-happy society. I can't afford to lose everything I own just because someone might not like the way I did or didn't save their hide.

[Guest db99wj]

Ok, I saw it in the 2nd vid that was posted. After he says he thinks it is a nissan, couldn't get plates, 80 in a 40, you see a skid mark and a shiny object on the tree on the right.

It would be easy to miss, not impossible, but what is weird, if you listen to the car motor, on straight away and coming out of curves, he is on the gas, when he passed the crash site it was just past a hill and a curve, he never gets on the gas in the straight away. There is hesitation. Like he might have been looking back or something. Can't say for sure. If he didn't say the comments about "trying to put on a show for the media" I would think nothing more. Those comments....

[DaveTN]

Fleeing puts the public in “immediate danger of death or great bodily harmâ€; that should justify the use of deadly force. Nature took care of this case on its own.

I don’t understand why anyone would think the crash was the Troopers fault? Whether or not he saw it is mere speculation, not "beyond reasonable doubt".

[TMF]

I don’t understand why anyone would think the crash was the Troopers fault? Whether or not he saw it is mere speculation, not "beyond reasonable doubt".

I haven't seen anyone question him chasing the guy. Even THP has repeatedly said that they support his actions pursuing the criminal. It's what happened afterward that has him in this situation.

[Guest President Fernatt]

I think it just simply comes down to the trooper's past situation where a girl died in a pursuit but wasn't found til the next day...added to the fact that the trooper passed the vehicle in this case too. In addition to his comments about "putting on a show" and calling a lawyer immediately.

I'm never one to jump at blaming police because I have so much respect for them but this case is just off a bit. His cruiser does slow from 51 to around 20 according to reports at the exact area of the wreck, as if he slowed to see it but then decided to go on. I could go along with the whole "I never saw it" story but in reports the trooper said he did in fact see the car but dismissed it as a parked car. I dont know about you folks but I usually don't park my car around a tree and then light it on fire to the point where smoke is 20-25 feet in the air.

I of course was not there but the Highway Patrol was awfully quick to decide on this case so there may be more to it; none of us know for sure. I can say that even if the trooper didn't see the wreck and only noticed it upon return, he surely wasn't too quick to jump out and check on the suspect. I mean, I don't know if there was an arm or neck left to check the pulse on but the trooper just ran up shooting the extinguisher in the air without taking any time to check on the driver before or after. Even when others tried to help he said, "no it's over"...IDK, just not what you expect from an officer. Maybe my expectations are too high but I definitely believe the trooper errored by seeing the vehicle initially but choosing to drive past.

I think it's safe to say more info will come out as time goes on.

[BluewaterTactical]

I can't see the wreck either. Either way I truly believe that the family is seeing a check in the making. I do not agree with that type of grieving.

None of know what really happened, all we can see is the tape, we can't see his brain. All the other write-ups are not helping him in this situation especially the one involving the wreck with the girl who was found dead the next day.

I do believe the THP has every right to suspend or terminate him for his dumba$$ comments to the media and his prior record but not for this particular situation, just my 2 cents.

[Lumber_Jack]

If you watch the full video, the crash is on the right at 1:18 mark.

[DaveTN]

Well for those that say cops cover up for each other, that certainly doesn’t appear to be the case here. I didn’t get to see the video and the letter recommending his dismissal until now. I don’t know anything about this Trooper, other than hat is in the story, but this appears to be a witch hunt spearheaded by his own Command Officers.

They say it was a legal pursuit that violated no policies, the suspect was fleeing, lost control of his car, which no one is claiming the Trooper had anything to do with, hit a tree and was killed instantly. He slowed after losing sight of the vehicle and then stopped further down the road.

What possible reason could this Trooper have for ignoring the crash on purpose??

And then they want to use the fact that he tried to call an attorney and as indicator that he did something wrong. He was just in a pursuit were the suspect was killed; I think contacting a PBA attorney when you know you are going to be interrogated is not unreasonable.

As someone else said there must be more to this story than is being made public. Now I want to know what it is.

This was a criminal that was putting everyone lives at risk and died while committing a crime. Now because they are going after this Trooper the family has decided they deserve a payday. If they fire this Trooper and it is determined they didn’t have cause; he will get a settlement also.

So…. The family of a criminal who was killed instantly of his own doing and a Trooper that they say didn’t do his job are both looking at costing the taxpayers a lot of money. I think we deserve to know what’s going on here. The THP needs to speak up.

[Timestepper]

I think that it doesn't really make a damn bit of difference what I think. Or anyone else who wasn't there for that matter. Aside from watching the video and reading 2nd hand comments made by others, none of us really knows what happened or what the officer was thinking at the time. We can tell by watching the video that the patrol car slowed down a bit as it passed the area where the subject crashed - what we cannot see is whether the officer actually LOOKED at the crashed car, just checked the intersection or even just found a straight-away and used the rear view mirror to pick his nose or something! There's no sharp intake of breath in the audio (which is generally an automatic and involuntary reaction to something like this) even though the audio is clear enough to pick up pretty much everything else. WE SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW and I, for one, refuse to second guess. It's simply not up to me or anyone not directly associated with the case to pass judgement.

It's too bad that the young man died - I guess somebody should have told him to never drive faster than his guardian angel could fly.

What the officer deserves or does not deserve is not up to me to decide, nor is it any of my business.

...TS...