Higher Severity Ambulance Fatal in Brampton Unusual Considering Typical City Speeds
Close-up of OPP Twitter photo of ambulance accident scene.
It is unusual that an ambulance would be involved in a significant head-on collision on a typical arterial roadway in Brampton, Ontario, resulting in the death of an occupant of the striking car. Yet this occurred last evening on Queen Street West and McMurchy Avenue. One would expect the various lighting on the ambulance, which was reportedly on call, would be sufficient in night-time conditions to provide warning of its presence. It was reported that the ambulance was stopped, waiting to make a left turn when the impact occurred. An obvious task of investigating police would involve looking at the pavement and documenting the location of gouges and tire marks that would place the positions of the vehicle at the time that the crash occurred. As the ambulance was reportedly pushed rearward tire marks leading from the impact to rest should have been created. This would quickly confirm what was initially reported by police, that the ambulance was waiting, and not turning into the oncoming vehicle’s lane. While event data recorder (“Black Box”) data should quickly establish the speed of the vehicles for several seconds before impact, it will not explain how the driver of the on-coming vehicle managed to direct his or her vehicle into the left turn lane and strike a fully illuminated, stopped, ambulance at such high speed.
We normally have an appreciation of the severity of an impact by simply looking at the amount of damage existing on both vehicles. It is important to look at the crush on both vehicles because, when there is a large difference in the stiffness of them, there can be considerable damage to the soft structure of one and very little to the stiff structure of the other. The idea is to consider how much kinetic energy was dissipated in the whole impact not just in one vehicle and this is often an interpretation problem when investigators make conclusions about impacts with transport trucks or trees. In the case of the ambulance it would have a relatively stiff front end yet we see substantial crush so, even though we cannot see the crush of the car, we would suspect even more crush at its front end.
The obvious mass difference plays a large role in reducing the potential of injury to the paramedics. There is also a slight benefit by being higher off the ground than a typical passenger car. The off-set of the direct damage is quite typical of what would expected as most head-on collisions involve such “left-to-left” contact on the front ends.
In the end there is some mystery here as to why this collision occurred in the manner that it occurred.
Aylmer Express Newspaper Journalists Acquitted
It was a test of Canada’s freedom, democracy and the public’s right to know. On this occasion the test was passed.
Early reports indicate that Aylmer Express journalists Brett and John Hueston have been found not guilty with respect to charges of obstructing police on June 24, 2017 when they passed through a road-closed sign in order to attend the location were a vehicle had reportedly driven off a cliff into Lake Erie. The driver died in the incident. Questions centred around the actions of police and whether their chase of the vehicle played a role in the death. The Ontario Special Investigations Unit (SIU) subsequently concluded that the driver committed suicide and police were not blamed.
The Hueston’s had an encounter with police wherein they were asked to leave the site of where the deceased’s vehicle was being pulled out of the water. As a result of a disagreement in which the Huestons indicated they had a right to be present, police charged them with obstructing their investigation. The resulting trial commenced in the summer of 2018 and a verdict was reportedly reached today, although the details of the judge’s decision are not yet known.
The case raises some important questions. It is paramount that police be able to perform their duties in an unhindered manner. One can understand the importance of preserving evidence and documenting it before it is destroyed. On the other hand it is also important that the actions of police be made available for the public’s scrutiny, as best as reasonably possible. Thus the need for specialist and independent journalists who can report on those actions.
The details of the actions of police and the journalists on the day of the occurrence are unlikely to be made publicly available to the degree that one can definitely conclude that a proper understanding has been gained. Hopefully, such a detailed account was properly developed through the introduction of evidence by the prosecution and defense, resulting in the court being able to make a judgment on a sound, objective basis. What information had been made publicly available led me to believe that the Huestons were wrongly charged and that police over-steeped their authority. Whether in fact that was the case still remains not fully revealed, but the court’s decision would suggest so.
What remains is how the future will unfold. The Huestons will likely remain to report on local issues and they will likely encounter the same police officers who were involved in this incident. A satisfactory solution cannot be gained by the simple judgment of the court alone. It relies on both, the journalists and police, to come to an understanding of their important and independent roles. On the part of the police, there has to be an understanding that the seemingly irritating presence of reporters and cameras must be endured as part of everyday police work. It cannot be escaped because of the importance that has to be placed on the public’s satisfaction that police are performing their duties as they should. This is not always pleasant as one can imagine instances where a photograph or video taken at a misleading occasion can lead to difficulties to police who must commence a difficult explanation of why something is not what it appears to be.
On the part of journalists there is also a responsibility to focus their work on providing a truthful account of what they have documented and to fairly portray the actions of police even when they have documented something that might appear to be inappropriate. The question must be, was the action truly inappropriate or is this simply an occasion to gain a good headline and more readership/viewers.
Finally, there is a responsibility in we, the public, to be cautious in our quick judgments and biases. Perfection is only in the viewing of a snowflake. Police, like all of us, are not snowflakes and not perfect. Rather than focusing on an individual incident that has caught police in a poor light, we must consider imperfect police actions throughout their undocumented career.
Non-Alcohol Drug Impairment Not Detected In Motor Vehicle Collisions
What has been revealed about the ability to detect non-alcohol drug impairment now that legalization of cannabis has taken place in Canada? For decades there has been a focused attention placed on alcohol impairment and various statistics have shown its relevance to major-injury and fatal collisions. Yet essentially nothing was mentioned about non-alcohol, drug impairment. It is only now that a discussion is developing because of concerns expressed that police may have limited ability to detect driver impairment due to cannabis use.
How many drivers were driving “stoned” for decades without detection?
In a recently publicized letter from Ontario Premier Doug Ford to Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau the reality was noted that only a single piece of drug detection equipment, the Drager DrugTest 5000, has recently been made available to police. But how recently? How many of these machines were available to police 2 years ago, or 5 years ago, or 10 years ago? The truth emerges that likely very little, if any, objective testing was available even a short while before cannabis legalization. So what was the public being told during these many years and why was this problem not made more widely known?
Even though cannabis can be detected a further discussion is revealing that it is difficult to determine what levels of THC, the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, constitute impairment. However this cannot be a new finding. Surely this was known since the decades of use in the well-known activities of youth in the 1960s and onward.
If nothing more, this discussion reveals how important factors in the causation of motor vehicle collisions are officially withheld from public knowledge. There are many unpleasant realities, like non-alcohol drug impairment, that do not have an immediate solution. The hiding of these problems become of way of not having to face them in the public domain. Yet their hiding is also the mechanism that prevents their resolution.
Mandatory Truck Driver Training – An Expensive Bandage For A Cancer?
There is a developing belief that privately-administered, mandatory, truck driver training will create reductions in the frequency and consequences of truck collisions. These reductions must out weigh the generated costs that are monetary but will also include a reduction in the numbers of available truck drivers and a reduction in the numbers of smaller, independent trucking firms. This belief cannot be based on a naive belief that the data collected on truck collisions can be relied upon to accurately identify the true cause of truck crashes. These are some of the issues that need consideration.
Humboldt Broncos Conclusions Drawn Though Evidence Not Revealed
Failure to release evidence regarding any major incident causes many unwarranted conclusions to be drawn. That observation has been demonstrated many times in history.
Thus it is so with the tragic multiple fatalities that occurred April 7, 2018 when the Humboldt Broncos hockey team bus collided with a commercial truck at the intersection of Saskatchewan Highways 335 and 35. Even though essential facts about how and why the collision occurred have not been made available many have already drawn conclusions as to how “the problem” should be fixed. To many “the problem” is already known and obvious. That is the true problem.
Officials who have control over transportation issues have used the Humboldt Broncos tragedy as the reason for making changes to how trucking firms will operate. Whether or not such changes may be warranted and correct must be independent of the issues of the Humboldt Broncos crash until essential facts are revealed. Even then, there is no guarantee that the procedures and analysis that were employed by investigators will correctly identify the true causes.
Most recently the operator of the trucking firm that collided with the bus has been reportedly charged with a number of non-compliance matters relating to the operation of his firm. While these are important matters they may be totally irrelevant to determining the cause of the crash. Yet the perception in the public’s eye is that it is somehow connected to the cause of the crash.
The public must understand that the ability to critically evaluate information that is provided through main stream news media, and more recently social media, is essential to the proper functioning of our society. Hysteria, bias and emotional reactions are not good factors to employ when it is essential that the root cause of an incident is properly revealed. Yet these are the factors that reveal themselves when essential facts about an incident are not made available. There are costs and benefits that need to be understood whenever decisions are made about the timing of the release of such critical evidence.
You must be logged in to post a comment.