Police Officer Impairment Conviction Demonstrates Complexity of Issue
Not all impaired drivers are the same. There are unique circumstances that lead unique individuals to make bad choices.
It has been reported that a 19-year-veteran of the London City Police was convicted of impaired driving following tests of her breath registering readings of 0.2 and 0.21, which are well over 2 times the legal limit. As an investigator with the major crimes unit the officer would have dealt with crime, criminals and bad choices on a daily basis. So why would such a seasoned member of the police become involved in such a senseless act.
Unreasonable expectations that police officers must be perfect at every occasion lead to unreasonably harsh judgments when that unattainable threshold has not been met.
There could be many reasons and those reasons could be complex. Stress, personality disorders, financial crisis and addiction are only some of the influences and causes of impaired driving. Those factors could envelope the life a police officer no less than any other person. For police officers it is not too difficult to recognize that the stress of the job could be an influencing or causal factor. But equally many of us have stressful jobs and could equally be affected.
In recent years an executioner mentality has evolved where some have developed the belief that trials and rights are a waste of time. When charged, these impaired drivers are obviously guilty and should be thrown in jail for a long, long time. When the results of an impaired driving incident become catastrophic expressions of anger and wanting of vengeance have prevailed. Patience, tolerance and a willingness to dig deeper have been replaced by impatience, intolerance and a quickness to judgment.
Yet the appearance of the individual seems to matter. The same crime caused by a prominent politician, police officer or other respected member of the community does not elicit the same response as the ragged, dirty and poor individual with no meaningful employment.
A recently completed trial demonstrates the complexity of impaired driving incidents. On December 3, 2011 To Ha Phan was driving on Highway 401 near Islington Ave in Toronto, Ontario when he struck and killed a pedestrian. He was charged with impaired driving causing death. However the young female pedestrian was also drunk. Yet the story is more complicated. She had been in a taxi when she reportedly needed to relieve herself and she insisted on exiting the taxi. The taxi driver reportedly called 911 and then left the scene. He left the female pedestrian on the highway rather than driving her to an exit of the Highway where she might be safer until emergency personnel arrived. The scenario was even more complicated as the deceased had been at an office party and her co-workers, recognizing she was impaired, placed her in the taxi so she could get safely home. The trial judge determined that the impairment charge to Phan should be successful however he determined that Phan did not cause the pedestrian’s death due to the unpredictable actions of the pedestrian on the expressway. So who was at fault? Were there multiple persons at fault? Was the restaurant where the pedestrian was served her alcohol at fault? Was the employer at fault for organizing the office party? Were the co-workers at fault? Was the Taxi driver at fault? Was the pedestrian herself at fault? Some might have the opinion that the matter is straight forward. To a select few everything is obvious and straightforward.
A key item that is missing in these judgments is a detailed history of the individual. How has that person behaved in the past and how that compares to the offence that has taken place. In some instances it could be as simple as an innocent drink or two among friends where alcohol dulls a person’s judgment. A normally reliable person who has had a stressful day suddenly takes more alcohol than he or she is accustomed to taking. Suddenly that person is no longer reliable and makes crucial judgment errors that they would not normally make. Is that possible? While it may not describe the scenario for a large number of impaired drivers it may be an explanation for some. It would be a good approach to understand what that specific person’s history is before grouping him or her with others. Again, what is important are the details. The history of the individual’s character and what led them to the actions that took place.
Whatever happened with the convicted police officer needs to be judged equally, in the same context as any other individual is judged, but most importantly, fairly. Whether a priest, beggar, alcoholic or politician. Regardless of who the person is or what the person does. That approach is not easy to attain and maintain especially when the impaired driver’s actions become personal. Yet anger and vengeance, much like alcohol, only cloud the mind, and prevent a person from making good decisions.
Vengeance is candy, and dandy as liquor, but there’s no human vice that causes wrong any quicker.
Worst Roads Season – Evaluation Fails to Use Objective Facts
Every year a province-wide evaluation of road problems is publicized based on subjective complaints. Why does the evaluation not use objective data instead?
An example of road surface problems on Wonderland Road near London, Ontario where Gorski Consulting conducted testing to determine the extent of the problem.
Every year the official news agencies publicize the results of a Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) “Worst Roads Campaign”. The custom asks citizens to report complaints to the CAA about roadways that, in their opinion, are the worst in their area. The CAA complies the data and the news agencies publicize it. The claimed benefit is that this process applies pressure on various politicians and road agencies to repair the roads and keep them safe. The problem with this campaign is its subjective basis. It means that, if enough persons in a specific locality complain about a specific road then it will be advertised as the worst road, regardless of whether it is the worst road. In fact, there is no indication that the CAA actually follows up with the complaints and conducts some form of objective testing to confirm whether the complaints are legitimate. One could see it theoretically possible for a group of “conspirators” to flood the program with complaints, simply for the fun of it. While such a action could seem amusing it could have real consequences.
Road repairs must be prioritized based on standardized procedures. Prioritization looks at the severity of the road deficiencies as well as the frequency of usage of the road. As an example, a safety problem on a high speed freeway like Highway 401, that could experience a 100,000 vehicles a day, would be prioritized for repair quicker than if that same problem was observed on a local, rural lane than experiences minimal traffic. When public campaigns interfere with that scientific process of prioritization bad things can happen that could affect the public’s safety.
Yet there is a simple correction that could be made to the CAA’s Worst Roads Campaign. Citizens could continue to make their complaints however, after those complaints are tallied objective testing could be conducted to determine if the top 3 or 5 roads merit the label of Worst Roads. While the CAA may believe that they do not have the ability to conduct such testing, there are simple remedies available.
For the past 5 to 6 years Gorski Consulting has maintained and updated a “Road Data” system on the Gorski Consulting website. This road data is gathered using a test vehicle that is driven along a road and the motion of the vehicle is sensed using the sensors of an iPhone. While one might think that a “cell phone” cannot be very accurate or reliable, that is not true. The iPhone is used around the world and its sensors must be capable of reliable operation with various gaming, computer programs. The test of their reliability is in the success with which such gaming activities are conducted without complaint or competition from other manufacturers. The iPhone is able to sense the tri-axial acceleration of the unit as well as its motion is space. This means that when the iPhone is attached securely to a test vehicle it will also sense the acceleration and motion of the test vehicle. This is the basis of the Gorski Consulting Road Data. Multiple video cameras are also attached to the test vehicle when the testing is performed so that very specific information is stored about the qualities of the road, not just the numerical data.
The iPhone is capable of sensing and storing a vast amount of data from a surprising number of parameters. Whenever it is used in a test vehicle all this data becomes stored and then sent to a spreadsheet. Yet it would be impractical to display all these mountains of data in the Road Data file. Thus Gorski Consulting has chosen to display the values from just one parameter in the Road Data file. That parameter indicates the rate of change in the vehicle’s longitudinal and lateral motion. In simple terms the test results indicate how much the test vehicle is “bounced around” as it proceeds along a road segment. While the remainder of the stored data is not reported it is available at Gorski Consulting should someone have a wish to study it. The data that presently exists in the Road Data file can be used as a comparison to the data obtained from any future testing.
Thus a testing procedure like the one conducted by Gorski Consulting could provide the objective facts to either support the subjective complaints of citizens or deny them. This could provide the legitimacy to the CAA Worst Roads Campaign. Without such objective facts a program based on subjective complaints can be of limited benefit while also being potentially harmful to road users.
Cycling Safety Top Priority In London Disagreements
Much like many North American cities London, Ontario is dealing with a transition from single-unit, automotive priority to mass transit and “active transportation”. The past one hundred years has seen the birth of the North American road network based on relatively uninhabited territories that existed over long/wide distances, new advancements in mechanization and mass production of automotive units operated on a vast supply of cheap fuel and a lack of concern for efficiency and environmental consequences. That period has been slowly evolving due to changes in all these factors.
Urban cycling should not be a life and death decision.
Mass transit and active transportation are seen as the future methods of transport. Yet, due to the quick evolution of the digital age, there is a parallel development of inter-connectivity and artificial intelligence that will revolutionize transportation as well as all of what we do. In the present and near future it becomes difficult to plan for what is upcoming because no one has a good grasp of how rapidly-evolving new technology will affect us and what path we will eventually follow.
The City of London Ontario provides an example of this struggle with prolonged debates over the planned development of a bus rapid transit system while also dealing with the need for increased infrastructure of active transportation.
Within the narrow issue of providing an efficient and safe environment for those wishing to use a bicycle, there has been much concern over how future paths for that motion will be developed. To date there has been a patchwork of incomplete paths that either follow the lines of previous roadways, or move along natural areas such as the forked Thames River. Whichever path system is considered, one can only observe that it is patched, incomplete and therefore substantially inefficient.
While all these upheavals continue, the most compelling matter has to be the safety of cyclists. Primarily this must mean keeping cyclists separate from larger cars and trucks but also ensuring that the paths of motion are sufficiently signed, maintained and designed so that cyclists are not involved in single cycle crashes or crashes with pedestrians or other cycles.
Sudden changes in direction and vertical slope at blind corners are not safe on highways and there are standards for that. Why are such designs deemed acceptable on paths carrying bicycles and pedestrians?
The signage, maintenance and design are of lesser expense and more easily rectified. Yet, in the City of London, there still remains a medieval understanding that cycling involves small tricycles being ridden by children in the vicinity of a household like it did before the 1960s. It has been more than 50 years ago, since the Arab oil crisis of the 1970s, that those children have jumped off their tricycles and onto their ten speeds and eventually discovered modern cycling. Cycling speeds and travel distances have increased such that they provide true competition to motorized vehicles in urban transport. In fact the grand tours of European racing have recently demonstrated that is it very feasible to develop cycles that are hybrids, with “engines” hidden in small crevices that make them semi-motorized and could become helpful to the mobility-challenged population of the future. It is time therefore to revisit the tricycle mentality and produce proper signage, maintenance and design that is current with the times.
OPP Make Correction To Erred Conclusions
In a news item published on December 27, 2018, Gorski Consulting questioned the OPP conclusions with respect to a fatal collision that occurred on Southminster Bourne Road. Those conclusions have now been corrected.
Southminster Bourne Road is located just south-west of London, Ontario. It was reported that on December 24, 2018 a pick-up truck travelling around a left-curve went out of control and struck a “bridge barrier”. The driver of the vehicle was reported to sustain fatal injuries. Gorski Consulting examined the site on December 27th. From that examination it was revealed that the vehicle made initial contact with a guardrail which caused the majority of the harm. A subsequent impact with a bridge railing was of minimal consequence. Given that the counter-clockwise rotation of the vehicle would have exposed the right front occupant to the greatest harm, we could not agree with the initial police conclusions that the deceased was the driver of the vehicle.
View of the collision site where the pick-up struck a guardrail and bridge railing. The obvious sign that the vehicle entered into a counter-clockwise rotation is in the visible “yaw” marks on the pavement leading to the guardrail impact on the opposite side of the road in the background.
The guardrail was struck just before the vehicle reached the bridge. The rail was displaced as it is designed to do.
View of the metal bridge railing where the rear of the rotating vehicle made contact after its initial contact with the guardrail.
In a subsequent statement released by the official media on February 21st, 2019, it was revealed that the police had changed their opinion. They believe that another individual was the driver and that person has been charged with dangerous driving causing death, operating a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol and impaired operation of a motor vehicle causing death.
Although Gorski Consulting cannot confirm or deny whether the newly-identified person was the driver, the altered opinion that the deceased was not the driver is satisfactory based on the physical evidence that was available.
Example of a Relatively Safe Police Traffic Stop
Police traffic stops near busy or high speed roadways are a genuine danger. Mainly to the officer, but also to all traffic in the vicinity. A “Move Over” law has been enacted in Ontario that is an attempt to make such stops safer. Unfortunately new dangers are created when vehicles move over and slow down on the approach to a stopped police cruiser. There has always been a need to study these incidents and improve them.
A recent photo shown on an OPP Twitter account showed a reasonably safe instance, as shown below.
This example of an OPP traffic stop is about as safe as can be. But such stops can never be viewed as sufficiently safe.
There are several features in the photo that merit mention. Firstly, the van that was stopped moved over substantially to the right such that there is almost a full vehicle width between its driver’s side and the painted, white edge line of the road. Such lateral clearance from moving traffic is always desirable for obvious reasons.
Next, the OPP officer’s vehicle is an SUV and the large mass of this vehicle makes it better “blocking vehicle” than a typical police cruiser. The officer has also done the proper action of placing his SUV closer to the edge line than the stopped vehicle. This is an important safety issue because, as can be seen from where he is standing, he body is protected, to some degree, from potential passing vehicles that might veer toward him.
The faster that vehicles travel the more difficult it is for them to change their lateral position and angle in a given distance. Thus the police officer was correct in placing his SUV rather close to the back of the stopped vehicle because this will lessen the opportunity for faster-moving vehicles to penetrate, laterally into where he is standing. If he had placed his vehicle further back then there would be more opportunity for such faster vehicles to move laterally into where his is standing.
There would have been some advantage gained however if he had placed his SUV further back. This is because, if the SUV was struck, it would require that the SUV be pushed a longer distance before reaching the officer’s location. During that post-impact travel distance the SUV would be slowing down and, if the officer was struck by the SUV, the impact would generally be less severe. So there are trade offs to be considered.
By placing the SUV closer to the rear end of the stopped vehicle there is an advantage in that, if the SUV is struck, it will have less chance to rotate and miss contact with the vehicle ahead. It is important to recognize that, by striking the vehicle ahead the SUV loses its post-impact speed. This results in a lessening of the impact severity should the officer by struck by that SUV. In a sense it is adding additional mass to the blocking effect of the SUV and thus helps in protecting the officer when an impact occurs with the vehicle ahead.
In many instances when the two stopped vehicles are positioned as they are, there is a benefit gained when the impact force is not applied directly at the centre-of-gravity of each vehicle. This benefit is in creating rotation of each vehicle and this rotation helps in reducing the post-impact speed of each vehicle when the wheels of each vehicle have a “sliding sideways” component. If the wheels each vehicle are simply rolling forward that “rolling resistance” is very small and there is often very little slowing of the vehicles post-impact. So this non-central impact to each vehicle is another safety benefit. So it is important for the officer to have positioned the SUV at the offset position that he did with respect to the vehicle ahead.
Looking at the composition of the traffic in the lanes, it is obvious that this is an arterial roadway and not a high speed freeway. While some arterial roads may have posted speeds of 80 km/h, most have lower posted speeds. So this is an advantage. If this had been a high-speed freeway then the danger to the officer would be exponentially higher.
Furthermore, looking at the composition of the traffic one can see that it is made of passenger cars and LTVs (i.e. Light Trucks and Vans). That is a safety benefit. Generally the vehicle that might strike the police SUV would be of a similar mass and that makes a huge difference in the post-impact results in terms of the post-impact speeds of the SUV and the other stopped vehicle.
The lack of any heavy trucks in this view is of great benefit, not only because of the mass issue, but also because of the visibility blockage that occurs whenever large trucks are in the vicinity. The driver of a passenger car or LTV who is travelling in regular traffic conditions is often positioned too close to the rear of heavy truck and that driver’s vision is greatly reduced with respect to events that may be occurring or existing ahead. In some unfortunate incidents the drivers of such vehicles change lanes to the right without realizing that a police vehicle is stopped in that right lane resulting is potential deadly consequences. Similar issues arise when the driver of such a smaller vehicle is positioned adjacent to the large truck in the lane beside them. When there is a high percentage of heavy trucks on the road they can be bunched together and create and effective visibility wall preventing the driver of any smaller vehicle from seeing anything beyond that wall. Overall, visibility obstruction is a major issue whenever smaller vehicles are mixed with heavy trucks.
For many previous years there were major concerns with respect to the safety of police officers when their vehicles have been struck while stopped along major roads and highways. When police cruisers were primarily of the Ford Crown Victoria type there were many incidents of a rear-ended police cruiser catching fire as the gas tank was ruptured. Installation of protective bladders and other adjustments reduced those occurrences. However it is difficult to protect any passenger car occupant while it is stopped and struck by a heavy truck travelling at highway speed.
Ultimately a police traffic stop next to a high speed highway or freeway is never a safe situation in the scenarios that presently exist. Some safety benefit can be obtained by making every effort to position stopped vehicles as far away from the through traffic lanes. Unfortunately that is not always possible as police sometimes must place a cruiser in a live lane, for example, to protect persons that may be in that lane from a previous collision. Whether it is a struck pedestrian or a person trapped in a heavily damaged vehicle, there are instances where police cannot move persons off the travel lane into a safer location. In the early moments when through traffic has not built up to a stop or crawl the situation can be very dangerous. Lights and sirens may not be sufficient. As mentioned earlier, in the vicinity of heavy trucks visibility can be blocked. Sirens may be difficult to hear in the noisy realm of a busy highway.
It needs to be recognized that the danger posed to officers at a traffic stop are great. More education and publicity focused on the general public’s appreciation of the dangers may be of some assistance. However police also need to be properly trained and understand those potential dangers. When those dangers are too high they must consider aborting such a stoppage or make quick adjustments to the scenario to create a safer situation. The lives of those officers depend on an informed knowledge about the unique circumstances that each scenario may present.
You must be logged in to post a comment.