The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Answer - No One These are from work yesterday, figured some of you might find them interesting. A 2007 Chevy Colorado Pickup broadsided a 2003 Dodge Ram at approximately 70 mph after thinking she was still on the freeway (She failed to notice that her lane was an Exit Only Lane leading onto an Off-Ramp/Exit No One Died if you can believe it. It looked like someone dropped a bomb in the middle of the intersection when I got on scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 If they found out you posted this, can't you get in trouble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotch-Rocket Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Women drivers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Bit Special Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Wow..... Unbelieveable pics... Even with the front end totally crushed, the body held together well on the Chevy... doesnt even look like the dashboard moved. Car technology is unbelieveable these days. Thank God no one was killed. Just wish people would f*ckin pay attention on the roads... that tw@t doesnt deserve to ever drive again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 If they found out you posted this, can't you get in trouble? Why is that ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Why is that ? I dunno, he was on the job, so unless these are crime scene photos he wasn't doing his job. If they are crime scene photos methinks he's not sposed to make them public like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I dunno, he was on the job, so unless these are crime scene photos he wasn't doing his job. If they are crime scene photos methinks he's not sposed to make them public like this. Ohhhh..I guess I learned something new today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 If they found out you posted this, can't you get in trouble? Well for one I didn't take the pictures. But no not really. There were no injuries, there's really no pending investigation or charges to be filed so it's safe. These pics are the same thing that were taken by the media at the same time so there's really no difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsis Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Well for one I didn't take the pictures. But no not really. There were no injuries, there's really no pending investigation or charges to be filed so it's safe. These pics are the same thing that were taken by the media at the same time so there's really no difference. Just asking, figured they were public photos. I heard of someone by me taking a pic of a crime scene for himself and getting in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 Just asking, figured they were public photos. I heard of someone by me taking a pic of a crime scene for himself and getting in trouble. Nah, if they were something more serious I'd never do it. These were just an accident with nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I heard of someone by me taking a pic of a crime scene for himself and getting in trouble. As someone who relies on the First Amendment a great deal, I can say that is horse****. If the picture was taken from an area where the photographer had a right to be, the cops can't do a thing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSJ Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Great photos. Glad to hear everyone was ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 As someone who relies on the First Amendment a great deal, I can say that is horse****. If the picture was taken from an area where the photographer had a right to be, the cops can't do a thing about it. Yep. We had everyone here. 2 TV crews and a Free Press reporter. If they're in camera range and aren't interfering with our scene, they can take all the photos they want. Unless it's a shot of my ass, then they better get the chopper in the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 The scary part is there WAS a child's car seat strapped in what was left of the rear seat on the impact side. After my heart sank I was happy to hear there was never a kid in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 The scary part is there WAS a child's car seat strapped in what was left of the rear seat on the impact side. After my heart sank I was happy to hear there was never a kid in it. Damn. That had to be an AWFUL feeling. I'm glad it turned out ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Well for one I didn't take the pictures. But no not really. There were no injuries, there's really no pending investigation or charges to be filed so it's safe. These pics are the same thing that were taken by the media at the same time so there's really no difference. Just curious, why are there no charges being filed against the girl driving the Chevy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Just curious, why are there no charges being filed against the girl driving the Chevy? Unfortunately, stupid isn't illegal. Thank God, I'd sooo be in jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Unfortunately, stupid isn't illegal. Thank God, I'd sooo be in jail. I thought she'd be at least charged with A) Speeding or the ever popular -failure to yield . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Unfortunately, stupid isn't illegal. Thank God, I'd sooo be in jail. If she's like 9 of 10 woman here in NY she was probably yappin on a friggin cell phone which is illegal here. I thought she'd be at least charged with A) Speeding or the ever popular -failure to yield . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 pretty amazing gob, unreal no one was seriously injured. dangerous driving comes to mind along with speeding no matter, there will be an assault arrest when her husband see's what she did to his truck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCarl40 Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Just lucky a Ford wasn't involved instead of those pussy trucks. Then there would have been some carnage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 no matter, there will be an assault arrest when her husband see's what she did to his truck. Actually it was owned by her employer.....GM. It was a program car. Just curious, why are there no charges being filed against the girl driving the Chevy? Like Thor said, Stupid isn't illegal. For all that she got a civil infraction for Faiure to Yield. It looks bad but in essense there was no 'crime' committed. She was 100% cooperative and checked ok on all fronts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewilly Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Actually it was owned by her employer.....GM. It was a program car. Like Thor said, Stupid isn't illegal. For all that she got a civil infraction for Faiure to Yield. It looks bad but in essense there was no 'crime' committed. She was 100% cooperative and checked ok on all fronts. do you find that most drivers are completely uncooperative immediately after broadsiding a vehicle at 70mph on street corner? ya know the ones who are concious anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gun Of Bavaria Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 do you find that most drivers are completely uncooperative immediately after broadsiding a vehicle at 70mph on street corner? ya know the ones who are concious anyway? If they're not drunk they're all most cooperative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny green balls Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Actually it was owned by her employer.....GM. It was a program car. GM will be sued w/o a doubt. the good news is the victim will likely get paid for this horrendous crash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boozer76 Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I don't mean to be the jerk-ass here, but in this pic I can clearly see the license plate number. Might want to take it and any others with it down: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted April 19, 2007 Share Posted April 19, 2007 Just lucky a Ford wasn't involved instead of those pussy trucks. Then there would have been some carnage. Did they memtion that both trucks were being driven at the time? If a truck is in the repair shop then it couldn't be involed in a TA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.