digger
12th October 2015, 03:00 AM
I am very peeved at the moment and I hope I can explain why..
Let me first advise of the circumstances:-
Last Tuesday we had the unpleasant task of attending a MVA at an intersection on the edge of town where a young lad lost his life.
I was off duty so attended with CFS as part of road rescue/fire crew (driving second truck so fill in whichever may have been required). Unfortunately as I said a young man misjudged the distance of an oncoming b double and pulled across in front of it (less than 45 metres away travelling at 80k) wearing the impact directly on the drivers door and B pillar of his small station wagon. He was killed instantly as the car was ripped almost in two, the B pillar ripped completely away and he was thrown from the car to the roadway. An incredibly harsh penalty to a young bloke for one seconds misjudgement.
For those who don't know, once someone at the scene is declared life extinct or injured severely and likely or possibly going to die , strict evidence rules apply to the scene and everything in it.
That means once anyone alive is removed from the scene and the scene is rendered safe by attending services, then everything else must be left in situ, this includes the deceased. Obviously what needs to be covered is covered as soon as possible and the scene is preserved.
This was all done, the passenger (injured ) was removed to hospital, the poor truck driver also taken to hospital for checks -(obviously he was in shock)
the deceased was covered, car, scene and truck all cordoned off with cones and traffic directed around the whole intersection.
Major Crash Investigation Section attended about 2.5 hrs later (pretty good as we are almost 2 hours from their base in ADELAIDE.) and after the initial examination of the scene and the deceased he was removed from the scene.
About 7 hours after we first attended we packed up and headed back to the station.
OK here is where/why I have my goat up...
On arrival back at the station we were told that the whole scene had been photographed prior to the arrival of emergency services and posted on facebook immediately! This included pictures of the deceased lad lying on the roadway!
I find this unbelievable, obviously the next of kin had no idea their son had been in a collision let alone that he was dead but there it all was posted up on social bloody media! (bastards!)
To compound this, the local paper have a long standing agreement with emergency services where they have access to a scene (eg: in the emergency services cordon- not the actual scene) to take photographs etc for their job. There is a briefing every year for this where it is stressed that there is no photos to include injured (without permission) or deceased or contaminated areas (eg blood stain/splatter pool etc etc)- along with training for safety etc (as scenes includes fires/ accidents etc etc)
The paper have attended the scene and been directed to a clearing to park before reporting to the group officer and the Police officer in charge of the scene to be advised and to take their photos. They have taken photographs from this point, showing the car and the blood stained blanket covering the deceased. Even worse they've taken video of the scene and then focussed on the car and the bloody blanket over the deceased lad.
Making this worse (as if it could be!) they've then led with a photograph on their front page showing the devastated car and the blanket over the deceased (but thankfully it doesn't show the blood staining).
They have then (just to make sure the town has exploded in anger against them) posted the video they took to their facebook site! The protests have been thick and fast and now they've edited the video so it shows the scene etc and the sheet over the body but cuts before they fully focus in like it was originally posted but left the rest online!!
Then they've written their story naming a local as being first on scene (she wasn't - she was probably 5th or 6th), and saying it occurred directly outside her business (thats 200 metres down the road) and giving three quotes allegedly from her (all of which she not only denies but is incredibly mad about).
So my beef (I hope) is obvious.
Why do people not realise that they are putting stuff out into the ether and out on the newspaper front page where everyone, friends, and relatives of those involved may see?
And why does it need to be shown to people who try not to think about this stuff as it disturbs them or brings back memories of others lost?
While I am at it,
what the hell makes someone think its OK to slow down and stare or even worse VIDEO on their phones etc the scene as they pass??
what kind of ghoul does that???
What 'knob" then "likes" that and or "shares" it??
I am increasingly disappointed by people now days when we are at scenes. Its amazing how many people need to take their dog for a walk at 2am and loiter around the edge of the scene of serious accidents etc...
The collision occurred at a cross road across a major highway and the day after the long weekend ended (and as such because the school holidays were on, many delayed their travel until the tuesday trying to avoid the traffic but instead moving it from Monday to Tuesday.)
People still, even with fire trucks, police cars etc placed across roads and cones and detour signs etc erected seem to believe that:
a) the detour/road closed sign doesn't apply to them or that
b) they can barter their way around the signs with whomever is manning the point !
c) a few even drove through the cones trying to cross through the scene, these were stopped (one nearly ran over a firey) they were then issued fines for entering the scene and had to supply a statement to be delivered to the coroner by being included in the coronors file which is prepared. In that statement they are required to state why they entered the scene.
d) recently (at another serious collision/fatal) we had the road closed, a rescue chopper sitting in the middle of the highway being loaded and a bozo decided to try and drive through!! Needless to say he left his car on the side of the road until bail was granted.
Anyway I am very disappointed with elements of the community and now you know why...
(on the other side of this there are a lot of people who shine at these moments and as a result of them by going way beyond anything expected of them and to those I am eternally greatful for and to them )
anyway Rant Over...:eek:. thanks!
Let me first advise of the circumstances:-
Last Tuesday we had the unpleasant task of attending a MVA at an intersection on the edge of town where a young lad lost his life.
I was off duty so attended with CFS as part of road rescue/fire crew (driving second truck so fill in whichever may have been required). Unfortunately as I said a young man misjudged the distance of an oncoming b double and pulled across in front of it (less than 45 metres away travelling at 80k) wearing the impact directly on the drivers door and B pillar of his small station wagon. He was killed instantly as the car was ripped almost in two, the B pillar ripped completely away and he was thrown from the car to the roadway. An incredibly harsh penalty to a young bloke for one seconds misjudgement.
For those who don't know, once someone at the scene is declared life extinct or injured severely and likely or possibly going to die , strict evidence rules apply to the scene and everything in it.
That means once anyone alive is removed from the scene and the scene is rendered safe by attending services, then everything else must be left in situ, this includes the deceased. Obviously what needs to be covered is covered as soon as possible and the scene is preserved.
This was all done, the passenger (injured ) was removed to hospital, the poor truck driver also taken to hospital for checks -(obviously he was in shock)
the deceased was covered, car, scene and truck all cordoned off with cones and traffic directed around the whole intersection.
Major Crash Investigation Section attended about 2.5 hrs later (pretty good as we are almost 2 hours from their base in ADELAIDE.) and after the initial examination of the scene and the deceased he was removed from the scene.
About 7 hours after we first attended we packed up and headed back to the station.
OK here is where/why I have my goat up...
On arrival back at the station we were told that the whole scene had been photographed prior to the arrival of emergency services and posted on facebook immediately! This included pictures of the deceased lad lying on the roadway!
I find this unbelievable, obviously the next of kin had no idea their son had been in a collision let alone that he was dead but there it all was posted up on social bloody media! (bastards!)
To compound this, the local paper have a long standing agreement with emergency services where they have access to a scene (eg: in the emergency services cordon- not the actual scene) to take photographs etc for their job. There is a briefing every year for this where it is stressed that there is no photos to include injured (without permission) or deceased or contaminated areas (eg blood stain/splatter pool etc etc)- along with training for safety etc (as scenes includes fires/ accidents etc etc)
The paper have attended the scene and been directed to a clearing to park before reporting to the group officer and the Police officer in charge of the scene to be advised and to take their photos. They have taken photographs from this point, showing the car and the blood stained blanket covering the deceased. Even worse they've taken video of the scene and then focussed on the car and the bloody blanket over the deceased lad.
Making this worse (as if it could be!) they've then led with a photograph on their front page showing the devastated car and the blanket over the deceased (but thankfully it doesn't show the blood staining).
They have then (just to make sure the town has exploded in anger against them) posted the video they took to their facebook site! The protests have been thick and fast and now they've edited the video so it shows the scene etc and the sheet over the body but cuts before they fully focus in like it was originally posted but left the rest online!!
Then they've written their story naming a local as being first on scene (she wasn't - she was probably 5th or 6th), and saying it occurred directly outside her business (thats 200 metres down the road) and giving three quotes allegedly from her (all of which she not only denies but is incredibly mad about).
So my beef (I hope) is obvious.
Why do people not realise that they are putting stuff out into the ether and out on the newspaper front page where everyone, friends, and relatives of those involved may see?
And why does it need to be shown to people who try not to think about this stuff as it disturbs them or brings back memories of others lost?
While I am at it,
what the hell makes someone think its OK to slow down and stare or even worse VIDEO on their phones etc the scene as they pass??
what kind of ghoul does that???
What 'knob" then "likes" that and or "shares" it??
I am increasingly disappointed by people now days when we are at scenes. Its amazing how many people need to take their dog for a walk at 2am and loiter around the edge of the scene of serious accidents etc...
The collision occurred at a cross road across a major highway and the day after the long weekend ended (and as such because the school holidays were on, many delayed their travel until the tuesday trying to avoid the traffic but instead moving it from Monday to Tuesday.)
People still, even with fire trucks, police cars etc placed across roads and cones and detour signs etc erected seem to believe that:
a) the detour/road closed sign doesn't apply to them or that
b) they can barter their way around the signs with whomever is manning the point !
c) a few even drove through the cones trying to cross through the scene, these were stopped (one nearly ran over a firey) they were then issued fines for entering the scene and had to supply a statement to be delivered to the coroner by being included in the coronors file which is prepared. In that statement they are required to state why they entered the scene.
d) recently (at another serious collision/fatal) we had the road closed, a rescue chopper sitting in the middle of the highway being loaded and a bozo decided to try and drive through!! Needless to say he left his car on the side of the road until bail was granted.
Anyway I am very disappointed with elements of the community and now you know why...
(on the other side of this there are a lot of people who shine at these moments and as a result of them by going way beyond anything expected of them and to those I am eternally greatful for and to them )
anyway Rant Over...:eek:. thanks!