Police officer charged with misdemeanor for collision that killed pedestrian

[Quetzal]

BENTON TOWNSHIP, MI -- A Benton Township patrol officer who was driving 30 miles above the speed limit when he hit and killed a pedestrian last month is being charged with a misdemeanor -- moving violation causing death, the Berrien County prosecutor announced today.

Officer Eugene Anderson Jr., 52, of Benton Harbor, was driving to a call about a domestic disturbance on Quince Drive when he struck Kimberly Bedford, 48, of Hartford, about 9 p.m. Sept. 20, on Pipestone Avenue near Rose Street.

The speed limit along that stretch of Pipestone is 35 mph, but Anderson was driving 65 mph, Prosecutor Michael Sepic said.

Anderson, a seven-year veteran on the force, did not activate his lights or siren, actions that would have exempted him from the posted speed limits, Sepic said.

"Absent the siren and emergency lights, the driver of an emergency vehicle is then bound by the speed laws as any motorist would be," Sepic said in a news release.

The charge of moving violation causing death has a maximum sentence of one year in jail.

Read more.

 

[Angel4Truth]

As he should be, since his siren and lights weren't on.

So do you disagree? What is your point here?

 

[fool]

In the big Sociological picture in the US right now the Cops are at a low point.
They need a serious tune up.
And they are getting that. BUT;
It's still a job that someone has to do and we have to have their back when they're doing it.
Some things you need to roll up on silent.
So, tough call on this.

I'll be glad to dog pile on a bad cop but I don't see it here with this limited info.

 

[glorydaz]

The misdemeanor charge brings a year in prison. With negligence it would be 15 years. Those are the two choices. The pedestrian was too drunk to drive and was not crossing at a crosswalk (four lane highway). The cop should have had lights and siren. I'd call it human error on both sides...not negligence deserving 15 years.

 

[Quetzal]

As he should be, since his siren and lights weren't on.

So do you disagree? What is your point here?

I am curious if others think the max sentence fits the crime, so to speak. One year for killing someone due to negligence seems like a light strike to me.

 

[Quetzal]

The misdemeanor charge brings a year in prison. With negligence it would be 15 years. Those are the two choices. The pedestrian was too drunk to drive and was not crossing at a crosswalk (four lane highway). The cop should have had lights and siren. I'd call it human error on both sides...not negligence deserving 15 years.

I would be happy with something in the middle. One year seems light while 15 seems heavy.

 

[ok doser]

the pedestrian was wandering down a four lane highway? :freak:

isn't that j-walking?

according to quetzal, the cop should have shot her after running her over

 

[Angel4Truth]

I am curious if others think the max sentence fits the crime, so to speak. One year for killing someone due to negligence seems like a light strike to me.

It doesn't to me, because the person hit wasn't crossing correctly and was also drunk. Their actions played a part also.

 

[glorydaz]

I am curious if others think the max sentence fits the crime, so to speak. One year for killing someone due to negligence seems like a light strike to me.

It wasn't negligence. Had they found him negligent, the charge would have been different. The officer was on the way to a domestic disturbance. He had no idea (unforeseeable) a drunk would come staggering across a four lane highway.

 

[Angel4Truth]

I am curious if others think the max sentence fits the crime, so to speak. One year for killing someone due to negligence seems like a light strike to me.

Do you think if he had his lights and siren on, that the drunk wouldnt have been stumbling out in the street?

 

[Town Heretic]

The misdemeanor charge brings a year in prison. With negligence it would be 15 years. Those are the two choices. The pedestrian was too drunk to drive and was not crossing at a crosswalk (four lane highway). The cop should have had lights and siren. I'd call it human error on both sides...not negligence deserving 15 years.

I doubt he'll get it. Likely plead. And you're right, this is like a case of contributor negligence on the part of the drunk. But for his illegal actions he is unharmed and alive today, even if the officer was in letter violation of the law in response to a situation he may have deemed warranted a silent approach.

I am curious if others think the max sentence fits the crime, so to speak. One year for killing someone due to negligence seems like a light strike to me.

I think you look at it circumstantially. If the police officer hadn't been responding, had simply been abusing his authority to speed around town, I'd feel one way about it. The limited facts here make this a half step removed from a simple accident. Again, but for the actions of the drunk, which were illegal, nothing happens.

Of course, there's another but for in here.

Do you think if he had his lights and siren on, that the drunk wouldnt have been stumbling out in the street?

That's the other one. And the answer is hard to know. One reason police and firemen and ambulance drivers use lights and sirens to run intersection lights is that it's effective most of the time. People see and hear them coming and have time to respond. So maybe, depending on how intoxicated the dead guy was.