News helicopters collide, killing four. Who's to blame? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

TotalMILF · 07-27-2007, 04:55 PM

Quote:

A police chase through the streets of downtown Phoenix turned into a midair tragedy Friday afternoon when two television news helicopters covering the action collided and crashed to the ground in smoke and flame, killing all four people on board.

KTVK-TV said pilot Scott Bowerbank, left, and photographer Jim Cox were aboard its helicopter.

KTVK-TV said photojournalist Jim Cox and pilot Scott Bowerback were killed. KNXV-TV identified its crew as photographer Rick Krolak and pilot Craig Smith.

The helicopters collided as the rival stations were covering the police pursuit of a stolen white truck towing a trailer. Assistant Chief Mark Angle of the Phoenix Fire Department said wreckage from both helicopters then landed in a downtown park.

Aerial footage from another station covering the chase, KPNX-TV, showed large plumes of black smoke and flames coming from the wreckage.

Angle said the "silver lining" in the accident was that the choppers did not hit any structures on the ground. The site of the crash was near a Veterans Affairs hospital and several high-rise buildings, he said.

"We do not believe at this time that anyone on the ground was struck," Angle said.

The National Transportation Safety Board announced it will send a team to Phoenix to investigate the crash.

Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Ian Gregor told The Associated Press that the agency is reviewing air traffic control tapes to see if the helicopters' pilots were communicating before the crash.

"Typically air traffic controllers clear helicopters into an area where they can cover a chase like this," Gregor told AP. "Once they are in the area, the pilots themselves are responsible for keeping themselves separated from other aircraft."

Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris said the chase began when police received a report of a stolen vehicle and began pursuing a suspect, who eventually abandoned that vehicle and stole the white truck that was being chased at the time of the chopper collision.

The suspect later bailed out of that vehicle and barricaded himself in a house, where he was captured by SWAT officers who stormed the residence, police said.

Phoenix police Sgt. Joel Tranter said the man was treated at a hospital for several dog bites before being booked into jail.

The police chief said the suspect will likely face criminal charges for the deaths in the helicopter crash.
advertisement

"I think he will be held responsible for any of the deaths from this tragedy," Harris said.

The park would remain closed indefinitely while investigators worked, Tranter said.

From ABC15

Quote:

By Chris Kline
ABC15.com

Two news helicopters covering a police chase on live TV collided and crashed to the ground Friday, killing all 4 people on board.

ABC15's helicopter was lost in the crash, killing Chopper15 Pilot Craig Smith and Photojournalist Rick Krolak.

Smith had been with ABC15 since September 2005. Krolak had worked at the station for 9 years.

The second helicopter belonged to KTVK (Channel 3).

KTVK has confirmed pilot Scott Bowerbank and photographer Jim Cox died in the crash near Indian School Road and Central Avenue.

The two choppers came down on the grass lawn in front of a boarded up church at the park, site of an old Indian school. Firefighters swarmed to the area as thick black smoke rose from the scene.

Rick Gotchie, working in a nearby building, was watching the beginning of a tragedy he could do nothing to stop.

News helicopters covering the scene live Friday circled over central Phoenix as the motorist drove erratically, then got out of the truck and carjacked another vehicle. Two of them began circling closer, Gotchie noticed, and one appeared to get too close to the other.

"I kept saying go lower, go lower, but he didn't," said Gotchie, a Phoenix air conditioning contractor.

In one of the helicopters, ABC15 Pilot Craig Smith saw the driver get out of the first truck.

"This may be the end of this thing," he said on-air. "OK, now it's a foot chase."

Police were trying to stop the motorist from leaving in the second vehicle when Smith's helicopter and Channel 3's collided.

"Oh geez!" was all viewers could hear Smith say as his broadcast broke up in a jumble of spinning, broken images.

Witness Mary Lewis said she was stuck in traffic with her four grandsons and was watching the helicopters, turned to talk to the children, and then saw a fireball in the air when she looked again.

"I looked up and I see this 'boom' and I see one of the helicopters coming down, and I said, 'Oh my God,"' Lewis said.

She said she went to the crash site to help.

"It's nothing there," Lewis said. "Just burned-up stuff."

Phoenix police Chief Jack Harris suggested to reporters at the scene that the subject of the chase could be charged in connection with the helicopter crash.

"I believe you will want to talk to investigators but I think he will be held responsible for any of the deaths from this tragedy," Harris said. He didn't elaborate.

The pursuit began when the motorist fled a traffic stop. He ultimately was later taken into custody by a SWAT team after barricading himself inside a house, said Phoenix police spokesman Sgt. Joel Tranter.

Barbara Cochran, president of the Radio-Television News Directors Association in Washington, said the group does not track fatalities among helicopter news pilots, but she could not recall another example of two news choppers colliding while covering a story.

"These pilots, they are very professional. They combine the skills of pilots and skills as journalists," she said.

Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Ian Gregor said the pilots of the five news helicopters and one police chopper over the chase were not talking to air traffic controllers at the time, which is normal.

"Typically air traffic controllers clear helicopters into an area where they can cover a chase like this," Gregor said. "Once they are in the area, the pilots themselves are responsible for keeping themselves separated from other aircraft."

Pilots generally use a dedicated radio frequency to talk to each other and maintain their positions, Gregor said.

"There is a high degree of coordination," Gregor said. "To fly for a TV station you have to have a commercial rating, which means more (flight hours), more training."

Keith McCutchen, a past president of the National Broadcast Pilots Association and a news pilot for 11 years in Indianapolis, said pilot awareness is vital while on the scene of a story because of the many distractions that could spell trouble.

"You are watching the scene. You have to bring your attention inside to look at the monitors to see what the audience is seeing so you can converse. But you're also having to direct your attention to the other aircraft flying around you.

"You have to have your head on a swivel in those kinds of situations," he said.

"I looked up and I see this 'boom' and I see one of the helicopters coming down, and I said 'Oh my God,"' Lewis said. she said she went to the crash site to help, but there was nothing she could do.

"It's nothing there," Lewis said. "Just burned up stuff."

From Channel 3

Quote:

By 3TV and azfamily.com staff

Investigators are trying to piece together Friday what caused the deadly collision of two news helicopters that were covering a pursuit through the streets of Phoenix.

Killed were KTVK-TV Channel 3 pilot-reporter Scott Bowerbank and photographer Jim Cox, and KNXV-TV Channel 15 reporter-pilot Craig Smith and photographer Rick Krolak.

The two helicopters crashed in flames in the middle of Steele Indian School Park. No one on the ground was hurt, but many witnessed the accident.

"I kept saying, 'Go lower, go lower,' and about that time, they hit each other," said Rick Gotchie, a construction worker who witnessed the accident. "The blue one came down nose first and the other one came down tail first and I was hoping for a door to open and no doors opened."

Some described the scene as "very surreal."

"My legs are still shaky," said one unidentified witness.

Chief Jack Harris with the Phoenix Police Department said many media helicopters were covering the pursuit of an alleged auto thief, who reportedly stole a utility vehicle from the area of Seventh Street and Broadway Road around noon. Two officers reportedly spotted the vehicle and began to pursue.

Realizing he was being followed, the unidentified suspect reportedly rammed the officers' vehicle, Harris said.

The suspect then fled into central Phoenix where many media helicopters began covering the chase. The perpetrator reportedly then hopped out of the utility vehicle and into another vehicle.

A short time later, the two helicopters collided in the air.

The suspect then fled to a home in the West Valley where he allegedly held police at bay. The suspect was taken into custody. The standoff suspect received medical treatment for injuries from a K-9 police dog.

He is now facing numerous charges including vehicle theft, aggravated assault on a police officer and unlawful flight charges, which are all felonies.

Harris said the suspect may face charges linked to the accident.

3TV reporter and anchor Frank Camacho described Cox as "very intense."

"He was very intense. He just grabbed life and ... and he was talking about getting ready to sell his home in central Phoenix and move to the suburbs because he wanted to begin his training as a helicopter pilot. He will be sorely missed. He was a funny, funny guy and very bright. He cared very deeply."

3TV reporter Mike Watkiss, who worked with Bowerbank throughout the years, called him a "great pilot." Bowerbank trained 3TV's helicopter pilot Bruce Haffner how to fly.

Gibby Parra, a 3TV photographer who worked with Bowerbank on "Good Morning Arizona," said the station's reporters would "fly with him any day."

Parra said Bowerbank was all about safety.

"You didn't have to worry about it. You did your job," he said. "Scott Bowerbank made it that simple for you."

Gov. Janet Napolitano offered her condolences to the families and co-workers of the four men.

Napolitano issued a statement, saying the four "delivered expert coverage of the news to the businesses and homes of Arizonans on a daily basis." She says they will be surely missed.

The following roads will be closed because of the accident for an unknown amount of time:

Central Avenue, Indian School to Camelback roads;

Third Street, Osborn to Indian School roads;

Indian School Road, Seventh Street to Seventh Avenue.

This is a tragic and horrible turn of events, indeed. My question to you TFPers is this:

Should the man being followed by the helicopters be liable for the four deaths? Why or why not?

I think he should, but only if one or both of the news teams were acting on behalf of the police. What are your thoughts?

Impetuous1 · 07-27-2007, 05:10 PM

I'm in the area so I've heard about this since it happened. In my opinion, I don't think he should be held liable. Although, it looks like that's probably what's going to happen. If he's held liable, I feel it could just set a precedent for all sorts of ridiculous lawsuits. I think it's strange that this accident happened at all. It makes me wonder what kind of navigation standards are in place to prevent accidents like this in the first place.

rockzilla · 07-27-2007, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TotalMILF

Should the man being followed by the helicopters be liable for the four deaths? Why or why not?

Well, it's certainly not the criminals fault that our culture demands live airborne coverage of every police chase. OJ Simpson is more responsible for that than he is.
What happened to those pilots and photographers is terrible, but the only reason that it happened is that every TV station wants to be the first to bring you the next episode of COPS.

MexicanOnABike · 07-27-2007, 05:13 PM

fuck that. it's not HIS fault they couldn't fly a helicopter. If a cop who's chasing the guy spins out of control and dies, then that's different. but in no way should he be responsible for what happens in the air. I mean the fucking news was so greedy that they didn't follow the rules of the sky.

yes it was the guy's chase that made them go up but they didn't have to follow so closely.

if theres a parade and the same choppers are watching and crash, would the parade organizers be responsible for the death of the pilots and cameramen?

yournamehere · 07-27-2007, 05:29 PM

This happened a block from where I work. While I didn't see the accident, I saw the smoke coming up from the wrecks - it was horrible to watch, knowing that four talented and professional men just lost their lives.

I watch Channel 15 every morning while getting ready for work, and watching Craig Smith (one of the pilots), who usually has his dog Molly in the cockpit with him (not today, though) is always a highlight of the morning. His cheerfulness and sense of humor was infectious - I will miss him. He also played in a rock band that donated all of its earnings to charities. A truly good guy, who deserves a lot better than "they couldn't fly a helicopter."

I suppose we're all to blame - we're the idiots who stay glued to the television while they air these things.

TotalMILF · 07-27-2007, 05:55 PM

The Phoenix police often solicit the help of news choppers to track criminals from the air that they otherwise could not track on land. In these instances the reporters act as an extension of the police, and often help catch criminals when police helicopters are otherwise occupied or incapable of getting to the scene in time.

If the news crews were doing the bidding of the Phoenix PD, then I believe it would be more than acceptable to prosecute the man. If the helicopters had been there solely to get a story, and had not been asked by the police to participate in the chase, then I do not think that the man should be held responsible.

I'm also interested to know how the whole thing happened (equipment malfunction? Just not paying attention?) Only time will tell.

It's just heartbreaking watching the newscasters choking up while they talk of their fellow reporters and cameramen.

The_Jazz · 07-27-2007, 06:03 PM

I guess I'm in the minority on this one. The fleeing criminal is liable. I don't think that anyone can argue that he WASN't the proximate cause of the accident. Those two helicopters wouldn't have been jockeying for position if it weren't for him. It's the same as if he had left a gun out where a toddler could get it - he couldn't necessarily mean for someone to get hurt, but he's the one who set it in motion. It was irresponsible, and he deserves to be punished for it along with his other crimes. That said, the charge should be something along the lines of involuntary manslaughter or whatever the Arizona equivalent is. It certainly isn't first degree murder like OJ Simpson.

And yes, we the viewing public share some blame too for demanding that these folks put themselves in danger to satisfy our urges. However, we also share the blame when a boxer dies in the ring for the same reason.

Cynthetiq · 07-27-2007, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

I guess I'm in the minority on this one. The fleeing criminal is liable. I don't think that anyone can argue that he WASN't the proximate cause of the accident. Those two helicopters wouldn't have been jockeying for position if it weren't for him. It's the same as if he had left a gun out where a toddler could get it - he couldn't necessarily mean for someone to get hurt, but he's the one who set it in motion. It was irresponsible, and he deserves to be punished for it along with his other crimes. That said, the charge should be something along the lines of involuntary manslaughter or whatever the Arizona equivalent is. It certainly isn't first degree murder like OJ Simpson.

And yes, we the viewing public share some blame too for demanding that these folks put themselves in danger to satisfy our urges. However, we also share the blame when a boxer dies in the ring for the same reason.

I'm with you. The guy may not be criminally liable, but he is still civilly responsible. This isn't for the criminal courts, but for the civil courts.

biznatch · 07-27-2007, 06:46 PM

I don't think the guy should be prosecuted for other people's mistakes.
The helicopter pilots probably took too many risks.

rockzilla · 07-27-2007, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The ABC-15 article

"News helicopters covering the scene live Friday circled over central Phoenix as the motorist drove erratically, then got out of the truck and carjacked another vehicle. Two of them began circling closer, Gotchie noticed, and one appeared to get too close to the other.
I kept saying go lower, go lower, but he didn't," said Gotchie, a Phoenix air conditioning contractor."

It doesn't sound like the criminal had any influence in what happened to the vicitims in the helicopters whatsoever.
Here's a hypothetical situation that could easily be real:
Pretend that I'm an international celebrity, and I just left a nightclub in my limo with some starlet. In the rush to get the first pictures, two drivers and two photographers crash their cars into each other. All four of them die in a flaming wreck. Am I responsible for them chasing me (and dying) just because I'm famous?

Frosstbyte · 07-27-2007, 07:00 PM

Are you people joking? Negligence requires a few things and, in most jurisdictions, one of which is that the injury is reasonably foreseeable to the person that they're trying to hold accountable. I think you'd have a very difficult time convincing an impartial jury (theoretically one who is not prejudiced against him simply because he's a criminal) that a news helicopter collision was proximately caused by the defendant's flight from police.

Furthermore, in most jurisdictions, an intervening negligent action severs liability for an injury arising out of an original negligent action. I'd say that one or both helicopter pilots clearly acted negligently (or perhaps even recklessly) which would prevent the fugitive from being held responsible.

While this is certainly a tragedy, it's really amazing to even think that the fugitive would have to answer for the mistakes of helicopter pilots who ought to know better. These people are, supposedly, experts operating equipment that they should know is dangerous. I feel very sorry for the victims and their families, but hold people responsible for their actions and their mistakes. The fugitive ran from police and by all means punish him to the full extent of the law. He didn't have a damn thing to do with how the helicopter pilots followed him or how good (or not, obviously) they are at their job.

MexicanOnABike · 07-27-2007, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockzilla

Here's a hypothetical situation that could easily be real:
Pretend that I'm an international celebrity, and I just left a nightclub in my limo with some starlet. In the rush to get the first pictures, two drivers and two photographers crash their cars into each other. All four of them die in a flaming wreck. Am I responsible for them chasing me (and dying) just because I'm famous?

I asked the same thing. If it was any other situation, they'd just be saying it's sad. but since the guy is committing 1 crime, might as well take him down for ALL of the crimes possible. I say fuck that. sure he fucked up but he didn't force the choppers to crash.

dksuddeth · 07-27-2007, 07:03 PM

it's ludicrous to even think about charging this guy with the deaths of 4 people who willingly and voluntarily followed this chase along with that of the notion that there were two people who had control of these helicopters and failed to observe basic flight rules of avoiding other aircraft

Cynthetiq · 07-27-2007, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MexicanOnABike

I asked the same thing. If it was any other situation, they'd just be saying it's sad. but since the guy is committing 1 crime, might as well take him down for ALL of the crimes possible. I say fuck that. sure he fucked up but he didn't force the choppers to crash.

he didn't, his actions put some culpability upon him.

as far as being famous, there isn't any laws one was breaking for being famous.

Frosstbyte · 07-27-2007, 07:36 PM

The law he broke was not "Failing to conduct air traffic control." They voluntarily chose to pursue him and they failed to do their job, i.e. safely fly a helicopter. Why is personal responsibility so faux pax? I'm not happy they died or something, but whichever pilot was at fault is the person responsible for the crash.

rockzilla · 07-27-2007, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

as far as being famous, there isn't any laws one was breaking for being famous.

Fair enough, the paparazzi doesn't have any sort of 'civic duty'. But neither do news choppers, unless they really were asked to help by law enforcement and one of those pilots had an honest reason to be looking for the best shot of the action. If that's the case, then the guy should face some extra charges.
But if it turns out that this was just a tragic mistake, then the carjacker isn't to blame. Besides, he has enough to worry about with the rest of his charges.

TotalMILF · 07-27-2007, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

he didn't, his actions put some culpability upon him.

as far as being famous, there isn't any laws one was breaking for being famous.

Exactly. If two idiot photographers chase down a celebrity and die in the process, it's nobody's fault but their own. If an idiot steals a car and takes police on a dangerous chase through downtown Phoenix, and two police officers collide while trying to apprehend the suspect, you bet your ass he'd be at fault. If the police purposely solicit the helicopter pilots to assist them in the chase (since they can see many things from the air that the police cannot), and THEY collide while trying to help apprehend the suspect, how is it any different?

I'm not saying he should get Murder 1, but he should definitely be held partly responsible for their deaths.

Polyneux · 07-27-2007, 07:58 PM

In all actuality its both of the pilots faults.

Any pilot learns from day one to keep your head and eyes on the move and they should have stayed well away from each other, and should have always known where the pilot was.

Its your own ass if a helicopter flies right towards you and you arent paying attention enough to see it.

There is a speed, height, and angle in helicopter flying known as the "Deadmans curve". Once you pass this threshold it is difficult to maneuver (which may have attributed to this crash), not only that should your engine fail there is not enough space to the ground for you to safely crash-land.

It occurs to me that any one with good sense will not go past the well known and practiced rituals of a pilot in order to help anyone. Self preservation is paramount in the human genome.

As far as fault goes you can even go as far as blaming the news service...pressuring the pilots to get the best and clearest angle for camera shots, which would lead to habitual bad piloting.

However I am somewhat confused as to why they were there in the first place? Where were the Police Helo pilots, who are trained to "help" in that type of situation, and are usually kept whithin minutes notice.

TotalMILF · 07-27-2007, 08:03 PM

Nobody denies that the pilots are at fault, since they did indeed collide, but they NEVER would've been there, assisting the police, if the criminal hadn't begun the chase in the first place. He is partly to blame, and I hope some sort of action is taken against him for their deaths.

MexicanOnABike · 07-27-2007, 08:03 PM

personal responsibility or common sense should fall on the helicopter pilots. If they felt unsafe in helping the cops, they should have said something. It's not like there was a lack of choppers in the air that day!! just from that article, i know 3 or 4 were in the sky at the same time.

the dude on the ground is not responsible for the aircraft.

what if I crash my car and i get thrown out and fall and hang on the side of a cliff.. I called the cops for help so they send a chopper to see how to help me and they crash... was that my fault?

TotalMILF · 07-27-2007, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MexicanOnABike

personal responsibility or common sense should fall on the helicopter pilots. If they felt unsafe in helping the cops, they should have said something. It's not like there was a lack of choppers in the air that day!! just from that article, i know 3 or 4 were in the sky at the same time.

the dude on the ground is not responsible for the aircraft.

what if I crash my car and i get thrown out and fall and hang on the side of a cliff.. I called the cops for help so they send a chopper to see how to help me and they crash... was that my fault?

You weren't breaking a law. You didn't purposefully and knowingly fling yourself off a cliff. You were in distress.

This idiot put countless lives in danger during this pursuit, and now four people are dead who were just trying to help.

Frosstbyte · 07-27-2007, 08:11 PM

MOAB, they're just going to say "You didn't commit a crime, so it's different." He's a convenient scapegoat for a tragedy. Instead of, god forbid, we hold an "innocent' responsible for being an idiot and not knowing how to fly his helicopter, we blame the guy on the ground. Yes, in some global sense he did "cause" them to be there, but he had NOTHING to do with how they flew or their skill in flying helicopters. It's chaos theory applied to liability.

Edit: They weren't "just trying to help." They were part of a media frenzy fueled by a voyeuristic society that loves disaster porn. I think the police asking media helicopters to "help with the chase" is bad for really this exact reason. They're not people trained to follow criminals. They're people trained to follow a story. I cannot imagine how absolutely brain dead those two pilots must have been to allow themselves to get that close to one another and then to collide. They blew it, and blew it hard. Life does not owe you a perfectly safe experience. One or both of those pilots made serious errors today and if ANYONE should be held responsible, it is them. The families of the reporters should, by all means, sue the negligent pilot who caused the crash, because the blame lies very clearly on him.

Baraka_Guru · 07-27-2007, 08:36 PM

I think many pilots will tell you that you are ultimately responsible for your aircraft. To make the criminal responsible is not the right thing to do. What if these same helicopters were trying to film a marathon and were jockeying to get a close look at the leader and crashed. Would the runner be liable?

Cynthetiq · 07-27-2007, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosstbyte

MOAB, they're just going to say "You didn't commit a crime, so it's different." He's a convenient scapegoat for a tragedy. Instead of, god forbid, we hold an "innocent' responsible for being an idiot and not knowing how to fly his helicopter, we blame the guy on the ground. Yes, in some global sense he did "cause" them to be there, but he had NOTHING to do with how they flew or their skill in flying helicopters. It's chaos theory applied to liability.

Edit: They weren't "just trying to help." They were part of a media frenzy fueled by a voyeuristic society that loves disaster porn. I think the police asking media helicopters to "help with the chase" is bad for really this exact reason. They're not people trained to follow criminals. They're people trained to follow a story. I cannot imagine how absolutely brain dead those two pilots must have been to allow themselves to get that close to one another and then to collide. They blew it, and blew it hard. Life does not owe you a perfectly safe experience. One or both of those pilots made serious errors today and if ANYONE should be held responsible, it is them. The families of the reporters should, by all means, sue the negligent pilot who caused the crash, because the blame lies very clearly on him.

That's not true. I'm all for personal responsibility.

I'm just saying that a civil court will find that the criminal is going to be liable for it.

Here's an example of there being a precedent for a criminal 2nd degree murder. This example is that the police officer was doing his duty so I can easily see a jury finding for a civil conviction.

Quote:

Jury Convicts Suspect In Highway Patrolman's Death
created: 7/20/2007 9:25:51 AM
updated: 7/20/2007 12:49:33 PM

KSDK - If it hadn't been for Massigh Stallman, Missouri Highway Patrol Trooper Ralph Tatoian would still be alive, and Stallman is responsible for his death, a jury has ruled.

In April of 2005, Trooper Tatoian was driving on Interstate 44 to the scene were police were looking for Stallman, a wooded area in Gasconade County. As he drove with his lights and siren on, he came over a hill near Pacific, and slammed into a tractor trailer. Trooper Tatoian was killed.

Meanwhile, more than 40 miles away in Gasconade County, police from several agencies continued the manhunt for Stallman. They eventually found him and arrested him.

The manhunt began after Stallman held up a convenience store, robbed a woman, and shot a Gasconade Sheriff's Deputy. The deputy survived the shooting, and Stallman led police on a chase that ended along Highway 50, where Stallman ran into the woods. The jury also convicted Stallman of charges related to those crimes.

Stallman's attorneys planned to appeal the conviction for second degree murder in Trooper Tatoian's death, saying he should not be held responsible for the crash.

Stallman, 28, is from High Ridge. He now awaits sentencing, which could include life in prison.

Baraka_Guru · 07-27-2007, 08:44 PM

Re: Jury Convicts Suspect In Highway Patrolman's Death

This seems more like vengeance, not justice.

Frosstbyte · 07-27-2007, 09:29 PM

I see a HUGE difference between a police officer chasing a suspect or rushing to get to the scene of a crime and a pair of helicopter pilots who failed to follow basic flight rules. Police officers or civilians in a street crash as a result of him zipping around I would be completely in favor of holding him responsible, as I see a very direct line of causation. Helicopter pilots are, theoretically, experts at what they do and they have THE ENTIRE SKY in which to avoid one another. I can imagine thousands of ways for crashes to happen because someone was recklessly tearing through a city on the streets. I can imagine basically no ways that helicopters could crash short of SERIOUS errors on behalf of the pilots.

Cynthetiq · 07-27-2007, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosstbyte

I see a HUGE difference between a police officer chasing a suspect or rushing to get to the scene of a crime and a pair of helicopter pilots who failed to follow basic flight rules. Police officers or civilians in a street crash as a result of him zipping around I would be completely in favor of holding him responsible, as I see a very direct line of causation. Helicopter pilots are, theoretically, experts at what they do and they have THE ENTIRE SKY in which to avoid one another. I can imagine thousands of ways for crashes to happen because someone was recklessly tearing through a city on the streets. I can imagine basically no ways that helicopters could crash short of SERIOUS errors on behalf of the pilots.

You can see that and so can I.

I can also see some lawyer, using a legal precendent to convince a jury of a civil responsiblity. This is America where people can sue because Starbucks sells hot beverages that are hot when spilled upon oneself.

Again, I don't see any criminal liabilty. But hey you can sue anyone for civil liability.

If you can bring a lawsuit to sue terrorist for being terrorists, well hell you can sue just about anyone.

Quote:

Widow of Daniel Pearl Files Lawsuit Over Husband's Murder
Thursday , July 19, 2007

The widow of murdered journalist Daniel Pearl hopes to elicit more information about her husband's death by suing those she blames — including more than a dozen reputed terrorists and Pakistan's largest bank.

"I am looking for the truth of what happened to Daniel, for our family, our friends, and the public record," Mariane Pearl said in a statement. "This process allows us to delve deeper into the investigation, and to bring accountability and punishment to those involved with his kidnapping, torture and murder."

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court in Brooklyn, implicates the defendants in the torture and murder of the Wall Street Journal reporter in 2002. It alleges Habib Bank Limited of Karachi knowingly provided financial services for Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.

Backed by the bank, terrorists "carried out the kidnapping, ransom, torture, execution and dismemberment of Daniel Pearl and broadcast those images nationwide," the lawsuit said. The suit seeks unspecified damages for acts it alleges were meant to "emotionally destroy the Pearl family and terrorize, appall and frighten American citizens."

Also named as defendants in the suit are Khalid Shaikh Mohammed — the imprisoned Al Qaeda No. 3 leader and mastermind of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — and an outlawed Islamic charity, the al-Rashid Trust.

The suit claims the trust, which banked with Habib, was a front for Mohammed and Al Qaeda that "abetted and conspired" in the Pearl slaying. Pakistan banned the charity earlier this year as part of an effort to dry up terrorist financing.

There was no immediate response to a message left with the bank's Manhattan office. Late last year, U.S. regulators announced that the bank had agreed to bolster policies aimed at detecting abuses by terrorist financiers, money launderers and other criminals.

Pearl, 38, the Journal's South Asia bureau chief, was abducted from Karachi while researching a story on Islamic militancy. His remains were later found in a shallow grave in Karachi's eastern outskirts.

During the ordeal, the kidnappers used the victim's cell phone "to call and threaten plaintiff Mariane Pearl, who was in Pakistan searching for Daniel," the suit said. "Realizing she did not speak Urdu, the kidnappers hung up."

Pakistan has convicted several men in the case. British-born Islamic militant Ahmed Omar Saeed Shaikh was sentenced to death in July 2002, and his three accomplices were given life prison terms. Their appeals are pending before the Sindh High Court.

Mohammed was caught in Pakistan and is now being held at the U.S. prison for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He claimed he personally beheaded Pearl, according to a partial Pentagon transcript of his testimony at a military tribunal.

Mariane Pearl is represented by Motley Rice, a law firm based in Mount Pleasant, S.C. The firm has brought other suits against Middle Eastern banks and companies on behalf of Sept. 11 victims.

Frosstbyte · 07-27-2007, 09:40 PM

Ah, well, yes, I guess that point is perfectly valid. I'm trying to wage my one-man crusade against America's litigious culture and I'll take any opportunity I can get.

Daniel_ · 07-28-2007, 12:51 AM

The way I look at this, if a guy runs and is chased by police who then have an accident, then the guy may be liable for something because there's an implied expectation that the police should chase people who seem to be committing a crime.

So in that case you may try to argue that the driver is responsible morally for the police accident (although the law will take a very different view in the UK than it seems to in the states).

Consider the case of a guy being chased by police, who are being filmed by helicopters (not the plural).

Any argument that the choppers are helping the police is bogus on the part of one of them at least - if the tv news want to help the cops, get the police despatcher to assign you to jobs. The fact is that the choppers crashed because two were jockying for possition to get the best pictures.

In the UK the oweners and survivors of the chopper crash would be prosecuted for not following air traffic rules.

At the time that the crash took place the driver may not have known he was being chased by news crews, and unless a very high proportion of police chases in his town are chased by multiple news choppers he would not have had a resonable expectation that the news teams would have been placed in a situation by his actions that caused them to crash.

Also - as an aside - what happens to that liability if it turns out that the driver is not prosecuted for anything relating to the cause of the crash.

We'd have the sceario that a guy was chased by police, found not to have been guilty of anything and then prosecuted for some type of wrongful death because some journalists were stupid?

In the past, bad things happened by accident and people blamed God, or evil spirits, or supernatural forces, and burned offerings etc.

Nowadays, people feel a need to blame a person or organisation, and sue them for money, or get them locked up.

The rhetoric seems to be "I am put out, it canot just be random bad luck, therefore I will sue".

Word: Sometimes Things Just Happen Because People Are Dumb.

Flying two choppers at speed in the same airspace whilst looking at things on the ground rather than the air around you is like juggling carving knives with a bag on your head.

analog · 07-28-2007, 03:57 AM

As much as I'd like to say he should be liable, there's just no way.

I'm not sure if you all read it, but it's clearly stated in the article: Once helicopters are cleared into an area, it's their responsibility to communicate and avoid other aircraft. They collided; it was miscommunication, machismo, or both. It's not the asshole in the car's fault that news stations put the bottom dollar so high up on a pedestal that pilots acted recklessly.

The pilots, on review of the tapes to see that they weren't communicating properly, should be civilly liable to the families of the cameramen. The only way I don't see this being their fault, is if they were cruising at close proximity and a sudden gust of wind threw one into the other. I doubt that could be. They put themselves at risk for ratings, and lost. Sucks, but not the chase guy's fault.

highthief · 07-28-2007, 04:17 AM

How about a little personal responsibility? The pilots are the ones who crashed into each other, goaded on by their networks and Joe Six Pack who demands police chases nightly on his TV.

I amazed anyone would blame the guy being pursued - he might be guilty of other crimes, but causng helicopters to crash into each other isn't one of them.

blade02 · 07-28-2007, 07:23 AM

There is a HUGE difference between innocent by standers and police getting hurt while a crime is being committed AND people who purposely get in harms way to make a PROFIT getting hurt while a crime is being committed.

The suspect should be prosecuted for whatever they were chasing him for, the car-jacking, and evasion, but NOT for the deaths of the news casters.

debaser · 07-28-2007, 08:40 AM

Perhaps the pilots should be charged posthumously for encouraging the suspect to flee. Perhaps he was just grand-standing for the news stations?

I'm with highthief: PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

The_Jazz · 07-28-2007, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosstbyte

Are you people joking? Negligence requires a few things and, in most jurisdictions, one of which is that the injury is reasonably foreseeable to the person that they're trying to hold accountable. I think you'd have a very difficult time convincing an impartial jury (theoretically one who is not prejudiced against him simply because he's a criminal) that a news helicopter collision was proximately caused by the defendant's flight from police.

Furthermore, in most jurisdictions, an intervening negligent action severs liability for an injury arising out of an original negligent action. I'd say that one or both helicopter pilots clearly acted negligently (or perhaps even recklessly) which would prevent the fugitive from being held responsible.

While this is certainly a tragedy, it's really amazing to even think that the fugitive would have to answer for the mistakes of helicopter pilots who ought to know better. These people are, supposedly, experts operating equipment that they should know is dangerous. I feel very sorry for the victims and their families, but hold people responsible for their actions and their mistakes. The fugitive ran from police and by all means punish him to the full extent of the law. He didn't have a damn thing to do with how the helicopter pilots followed him or how good (or not, obviously) they are at their job.

Conviction will be tough if not impossible. You're right there. That doesn't mean that they won't charge him with it while they trying him for everything else.

Juries are stupid. It's a truism. Everything get played to the lowest common denominator in a courtroom, which is why it's at least worth the PR for the DA to charge the guy. Even if their later dismissed or dropped, the DA looks like he's gone after the criminal who's responsible for the action that caused the accident. He'd be charged if a police officer in the chase hit a pedestrian, so I don't see why it would be such a stretch to at least charge him.

biznatch · 07-28-2007, 02:21 PM

I'd just like to respond to the people who argue that the police might've needed the helicopters. The article from BBC says they had helicopters from FIVE different news stations. The police don't need that many.

I just think police chases in America are some kind of urban Nascar, you try and get the best angles for the crashes. Maybe now they'll have cars following news helicopters too, just in case, so they can replay it 15 times in 3 differents kinds of slow-motion.

krwlz · 07-28-2007, 03:15 PM

From a law standpoint, I'm fairly sure that the guy in the stolen car would have had to be capable of making a reasonable assumption that that crash could happen due directly to his actions to make the liability stick.

As far as my opinion, he should not be held liable. The fault of the crash lays in one or both of the helicopter pilots. As pilots, they are responsible for keeping their vehicle out of the way or other airborne vehicles.

That guy's only crime was stealing a car.

flstf · 07-28-2007, 04:12 PM

Holding suspects responsible for the accidents of reporters rushing to cover their arrest for the evening news. This should help further clog up the criminal and civil court dockets as well as create a lot of new work for lawyers. Imagine the frenzy to cover the next arrest of Paris or Lyndsay.

shakran · 07-28-2007, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TotalMILF

Should the man being followed by the helicopters be liable for the four deaths? Why or why not?

I think he should, but only if one or both of the news teams were acting on behalf of the police. What are your thoughts?

1) news teams do not act on behalf of the police. Ever. If they do, they shouldn't be in news anymore.

2) The man did not make the news team follow the police chase. He's not responsible.

The immediate ones responsible are the pilots. They should be flying the helicopter first, taking directions from the photogs second.

The REAL responsibility lies with the idiot news directors who get a hardon every time there's a damn police chase. Repeat with me folks, POLICE CHASES ARE NOT NEWS. They're fun video. They're good fodder for Cops and Worlds Wildest Police Videos, but they do not belong on the news. Asinine masturbatory "look what we can show you with our Super-HD DopplerCopter Chopper 11" should not be the mission of a newsroom.

albania · 07-28-2007, 07:31 PM

I guess echoing previous statements, I'd have to say that I also believe the (accused) criminal shouldn't be held responsible. Since people have been using the example of police cars having an accident while chasing a suspect I guess I'll use that one too. There is an implicit assumption that if you are being chased by the cops they may be forced to try to apprehend you by driving dangerously themselves. If the cops should happen to have an accident, then, while perhaps unfair and random, it seems socially just that the criminal should be held accountable in that case.

On the other hand, I wouldn't assume that a helicopter has to incur considerable risk while chasing a car. In fact, I don't understand why you would need two helicopters to chase one car, or however many there were. So in this case I wouldn't consider the criminal at fault.

shakran · 07-28-2007, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albania

I don't understand why you would need two helicopters to chase one car

The choppers were from 2 different stations. We don't generally share video with each other unless there's a pool arrangement worked out beforehand.

07-27-2007, 05:13 PM	#4 (permalink)
MexicanOnABike Location: up north	fuck that. it's not HIS fault they couldn't fly a helicopter. If a cop who's chasing the guy spins out of control and dies, then that's different. but in no way should he be responsible for what happens in the air. I mean the fucking news was so greedy that they didn't follow the rules of the sky. yes it was the guy's chase that made them go up but they didn't have to follow so closely. if theres a parade and the same choppers are watching and crash, would the parade organizers be responsible for the death of the pilots and cameramen? __________________ - Movie Reviews - Ratings-

07-27-2007, 05:29 PM	#5 (permalink)
yournamehere Invisible Location: tentative, at best	This happened a block from where I work. While I didn't see the accident, I saw the smoke coming up from the wrecks - it was horrible to watch, knowing that four talented and professional men just lost their lives. I watch Channel 15 every morning while getting ready for work, and watching Craig Smith (one of the pilots), who usually has his dog Molly in the cockpit with him (not today, though) is always a highlight of the morning. His cheerfulness and sense of humor was infectious - I will miss him. He also played in a rock band that donated all of its earnings to charities. A truly good guy, who deserves a lot better than "they couldn't fly a helicopter." I suppose we're all to blame - we're the idiots who stay glued to the television while they air these things. __________________ If you want to avoid 95% of internet spelling errors: "If your ridiculous pants are too loose, you're definitely going to lose them. Tell your two loser friends over there that they're going to lose theirs, too." It won't hurt your fashion sense, either.

07-27-2007, 05:55 PM	#6 (permalink)
TotalMILF Delusional... but in a funny way Location: deeee-TROIT!!!	The Phoenix police often solicit the help of news choppers to track criminals from the air that they otherwise could not track on land. In these instances the reporters act as an extension of the police, and often help catch criminals when police helicopters are otherwise occupied or incapable of getting to the scene in time. If the news crews were doing the bidding of the Phoenix PD, then I believe it would be more than acceptable to prosecute the man. If the helicopters had been there solely to get a story, and had not been asked by the police to participate in the chase, then I do not think that the man should be held responsible. I'm also interested to know how the whole thing happened (equipment malfunction? Just not paying attention?) Only time will tell. It's just heartbreaking watching the newscasters choking up while they talk of their fellow reporters and cameramen. __________________ "I'm sorry, all I heard was blah blah blah, I'm a dirty tramp."

07-27-2007, 06:03 PM	#7 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	I guess I'm in the minority on this one. The fleeing criminal is liable. I don't think that anyone can argue that he WASN't the proximate cause of the accident. Those two helicopters wouldn't have been jockeying for position if it weren't for him. It's the same as if he had left a gun out where a toddler could get it - he couldn't necessarily mean for someone to get hurt, but he's the one who set it in motion. It was irresponsible, and he deserves to be punished for it along with his other crimes. That said, the charge should be something along the lines of involuntary manslaughter or whatever the Arizona equivalent is. It certainly isn't first degree murder like OJ Simpson. And yes, we the viewing public share some blame too for demanding that these folks put themselves in danger to satisfy our urges. However, we also share the blame when a boxer dies in the ring for the same reason. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

07-27-2007, 06:46 PM	#9 (permalink)
biznatch Junkie Location: France	I don't think the guy should be prosecuted for other people's mistakes. The helicopter pilots probably took too many risks. __________________ Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread

07-27-2007, 05:10 PM	#2 (permalink)
Impetuous1 Insane Location: Arizona	I'm in the area so I've heard about this since it happened. In my opinion, I don't think he should be held liable. Although, it looks like that's probably what's going to happen. If he's held liable, I feel it could just set a precedent for all sorts of ridiculous lawsuits. I think it's strange that this accident happened at all. It makes me wonder what kind of navigation standards are in place to prevent accidents like this in the first place.

07-27-2007, 07:00 PM	#11 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	Are you people joking? Negligence requires a few things and, in most jurisdictions, one of which is that the injury is reasonably foreseeable to the person that they're trying to hold accountable. I think you'd have a very difficult time convincing an impartial jury (theoretically one who is not prejudiced against him simply because he's a criminal) that a news helicopter collision was proximately caused by the defendant's flight from police. Furthermore, in most jurisdictions, an intervening negligent action severs liability for an injury arising out of an original negligent action. I'd say that one or both helicopter pilots clearly acted negligently (or perhaps even recklessly) which would prevent the fugitive from being held responsible. While this is certainly a tragedy, it's really amazing to even think that the fugitive would have to answer for the mistakes of helicopter pilots who ought to know better. These people are, supposedly, experts operating equipment that they should know is dangerous. I feel very sorry for the victims and their families, but hold people responsible for their actions and their mistakes. The fugitive ran from police and by all means punish him to the full extent of the law. He didn't have a damn thing to do with how the helicopter pilots followed him or how good (or not, obviously) they are at their job.

07-27-2007, 07:03 PM	#13 (permalink)
dksuddeth Junkie Location: bedford, tx	it's ludicrous to even think about charging this guy with the deaths of 4 people who willingly and voluntarily followed this chase along with that of the notion that there were two people who had control of these helicopters and failed to observe basic flight rules of avoiding other aircraft __________________ "no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

07-27-2007, 07:36 PM	#15 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	The law he broke was not "Failing to conduct air traffic control." They voluntarily chose to pursue him and they failed to do their job, i.e. safely fly a helicopter. Why is personal responsibility so faux pax? I'm not happy they died or something, but whichever pilot was at fault is the person responsible for the crash.

07-27-2007, 07:58 PM	#18 (permalink)
Polyneux Upright	In all actuality its both of the pilots faults. Any pilot learns from day one to keep your head and eyes on the move and they should have stayed well away from each other, and should have always known where the pilot was. Its your own ass if a helicopter flies right towards you and you arent paying attention enough to see it. There is a speed, height, and angle in helicopter flying known as the "Deadmans curve". Once you pass this threshold it is difficult to maneuver (which may have attributed to this crash), not only that should your engine fail there is not enough space to the ground for you to safely crash-land. It occurs to me that any one with good sense will not go past the well known and practiced rituals of a pilot in order to help anyone. Self preservation is paramount in the human genome. As far as fault goes you can even go as far as blaming the news service...pressuring the pilots to get the best and clearest angle for camera shots, which would lead to habitual bad piloting. However I am somewhat confused as to why they were there in the first place? Where were the Police Helo pilots, who are trained to "help" in that type of situation, and are usually kept whithin minutes notice. Last edited by Polyneux; 07-27-2007 at 08:12 PM..

07-27-2007, 08:03 PM	#19 (permalink)
TotalMILF Delusional... but in a funny way Location: deeee-TROIT!!!	Nobody denies that the pilots are at fault, since they did indeed collide, but they NEVER would've been there, assisting the police, if the criminal hadn't begun the chase in the first place. He is partly to blame, and I hope some sort of action is taken against him for their deaths. __________________ "I'm sorry, all I heard was blah blah blah, I'm a dirty tramp."

07-27-2007, 08:03 PM	#20 (permalink)
MexicanOnABike Location: up north	personal responsibility or common sense should fall on the helicopter pilots. If they felt unsafe in helping the cops, they should have said something. It's not like there was a lack of choppers in the air that day!! just from that article, i know 3 or 4 were in the sky at the same time. the dude on the ground is not responsible for the aircraft. what if I crash my car and i get thrown out and fall and hang on the side of a cliff.. I called the cops for help so they send a chopper to see how to help me and they crash... was that my fault? __________________ - Movie Reviews - Ratings-

07-27-2007, 08:11 PM	#22 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	MOAB, they're just going to say "You didn't commit a crime, so it's different." He's a convenient scapegoat for a tragedy. Instead of, god forbid, we hold an "innocent' responsible for being an idiot and not knowing how to fly his helicopter, we blame the guy on the ground. Yes, in some global sense he did "cause" them to be there, but he had NOTHING to do with how they flew or their skill in flying helicopters. It's chaos theory applied to liability. Edit: They weren't "just trying to help." They were part of a media frenzy fueled by a voyeuristic society that loves disaster porn. I think the police asking media helicopters to "help with the chase" is bad for really this exact reason. They're not people trained to follow criminals. They're people trained to follow a story. I cannot imagine how absolutely brain dead those two pilots must have been to allow themselves to get that close to one another and then to collide. They blew it, and blew it hard. Life does not owe you a perfectly safe experience. One or both of those pilots made serious errors today and if ANYONE should be held responsible, it is them. The families of the reporters should, by all means, sue the negligent pilot who caused the crash, because the blame lies very clearly on him. Last edited by Frosstbyte; 07-27-2007 at 08:22 PM..

07-27-2007, 08:36 PM	#23 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	I think many pilots will tell you that you are ultimately responsible for your aircraft. To make the criminal responsible is not the right thing to do. What if these same helicopters were trying to film a marathon and were jockeying to get a close look at the leader and crashed. Would the runner be liable? __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

07-27-2007, 08:44 PM	#25 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	Re: Jury Convicts Suspect In Highway Patrolman's Death This seems more like vengeance, not justice. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

07-27-2007, 09:29 PM	#26 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	I see a HUGE difference between a police officer chasing a suspect or rushing to get to the scene of a crime and a pair of helicopter pilots who failed to follow basic flight rules. Police officers or civilians in a street crash as a result of him zipping around I would be completely in favor of holding him responsible, as I see a very direct line of causation. Helicopter pilots are, theoretically, experts at what they do and they have THE ENTIRE SKY in which to avoid one another. I can imagine thousands of ways for crashes to happen because someone was recklessly tearing through a city on the streets. I can imagine basically no ways that helicopters could crash short of SERIOUS errors on behalf of the pilots.

07-27-2007, 09:40 PM	#28 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	Ah, well, yes, I guess that point is perfectly valid. I'm trying to wage my one-man crusade against America's litigious culture and I'll take any opportunity I can get.

07-28-2007, 12:51 AM	#29 (permalink)
Daniel_ Evil Priest: The Devil Made Me Do It! Location: Southern England	The way I look at this, if a guy runs and is chased by police who then have an accident, then the guy may be liable for something because there's an implied expectation that the police should chase people who seem to be committing a crime. So in that case you may try to argue that the driver is responsible morally for the police accident (although the law will take a very different view in the UK than it seems to in the states). Consider the case of a guy being chased by police, who are being filmed by helicopters (not the plural). Any argument that the choppers are helping the police is bogus on the part of one of them at least - if the tv news want to help the cops, get the police despatcher to assign you to jobs. The fact is that the choppers crashed because two were jockying for possition to get the best pictures. In the UK the oweners and survivors of the chopper crash would be prosecuted for not following air traffic rules. At the time that the crash took place the driver may not have known he was being chased by news crews, and unless a very high proportion of police chases in his town are chased by multiple news choppers he would not have had a resonable expectation that the news teams would have been placed in a situation by his actions that caused them to crash. Also - as an aside - what happens to that liability if it turns out that the driver is not prosecuted for anything relating to the cause of the crash. We'd have the sceario that a guy was chased by police, found not to have been guilty of anything and then prosecuted for some type of wrongful death because some journalists were stupid? In the past, bad things happened by accident and people blamed God, or evil spirits, or supernatural forces, and burned offerings etc. Nowadays, people feel a need to blame a person or organisation, and sue them for money, or get them locked up. The rhetoric seems to be "I am put out, it canot just be random bad luck, therefore I will sue". Word: Sometimes Things Just Happen Because People Are Dumb. Flying two choppers at speed in the same airspace whilst looking at things on the ground rather than the air around you is like juggling carving knives with a bag on your head. __________________ ╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗ Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air, And deep beneath the rolling waves, In labyrinths of Coral Caves, The Echo of a distant time Comes willowing across the sand; And everthing is Green and Submarine ╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝

07-28-2007, 03:57 AM	#30 (permalink)
analog Banned	As much as I'd like to say he should be liable, there's just no way. I'm not sure if you all read it, but it's clearly stated in the article: Once helicopters are cleared into an area, it's their responsibility to communicate and avoid other aircraft. They collided; it was miscommunication, machismo, or both. It's not the asshole in the car's fault that news stations put the bottom dollar so high up on a pedestal that pilots acted recklessly. The pilots, on review of the tapes to see that they weren't communicating properly, should be civilly liable to the families of the cameramen. The only way I don't see this being their fault, is if they were cruising at close proximity and a sudden gust of wind threw one into the other. I doubt that could be. They put themselves at risk for ratings, and lost. Sucks, but not the chase guy's fault.

07-28-2007, 04:17 AM	#31 (permalink)
highthief Junkie Location: Ontario, Canada	How about a little personal responsibility? The pilots are the ones who crashed into each other, goaded on by their networks and Joe Six Pack who demands police chases nightly on his TV. I amazed anyone would blame the guy being pursued - he might be guilty of other crimes, but causng helicopters to crash into each other isn't one of them. __________________ Si vis pacem parabellum.

07-28-2007, 07:23 AM	#32 (permalink)
blade02 Insane	There is a HUGE difference between innocent by standers and police getting hurt while a crime is being committed AND people who purposely get in harms way to make a PROFIT getting hurt while a crime is being committed. The suspect should be prosecuted for whatever they were chasing him for, the car-jacking, and evasion, but NOT for the deaths of the news casters.

07-28-2007, 08:40 AM	#33 (permalink)
debaser Sir, I have a plan... Location: 38S NC20943324	Perhaps the pilots should be charged posthumously for encouraging the suspect to flee. Perhaps he was just grand-standing for the news stations? I'm with highthief: PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. __________________ Fortunato became immured to the sound of the trowel after a while.

07-28-2007, 02:21 PM	#35 (permalink)
biznatch Junkie Location: France	I'd just like to respond to the people who argue that the police might've needed the helicopters. The article from BBC says they had helicopters from FIVE different news stations. The police don't need that many. I just think police chases in America are some kind of urban Nascar, you try and get the best angles for the crashes. Maybe now they'll have cars following news helicopters too, just in case, so they can replay it 15 times in 3 differents kinds of slow-motion. __________________ Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread

07-28-2007, 03:15 PM	#36 (permalink)
krwlz Fledgling Dead Head Location: Clarkson U.	From a law standpoint, I'm fairly sure that the guy in the stolen car would have had to be capable of making a reasonable assumption that that crash could happen due directly to his actions to make the liability stick. As far as my opinion, he should not be held liable. The fault of the crash lays in one or both of the helicopter pilots. As pilots, they are responsible for keeping their vehicle out of the way or other airborne vehicles. That guy's only crime was stealing a car.

07-28-2007, 04:12 PM	#37 (permalink)
flstf Easy Rider Location: Moscow on the Ohio	Holding suspects responsible for the accidents of reporters rushing to cover their arrest for the evening news. This should help further clog up the criminal and civil court dockets as well as create a lot of new work for lawyers. Imagine the frenzy to cover the next arrest of Paris or Lyndsay.

07-28-2007, 07:31 PM	#39 (permalink)
albania Psycho	I guess echoing previous statements, I'd have to say that I also believe the (accused) criminal shouldn't be held responsible. Since people have been using the example of police cars having an accident while chasing a suspect I guess I'll use that one too. There is an implicit assumption that if you are being chased by the cops they may be forced to try to apprehend you by driving dangerously themselves. If the cops should happen to have an accident, then, while perhaps unfair and random, it seems socially just that the criminal should be held accountable in that case. On the other hand, I wouldn't assume that a helicopter has to incur considerable risk while chasing a car. In fact, I don't understand why you would need two helicopters to chase one car, or however many there were. So in this case I wouldn't consider the criminal at fault.