Originally Posted by SecretMethod70 (Post 2730504)

Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law is a standard we use for criminal cases, not for deciding when it is appropriate to fire someone.

Originally Posted by Fotzlid (Post 2730539)

It is a criminal case.

Originally Posted by Fotzlid (Post 2730542)

So anyone accused of a crime should automatically lose their job?

Originally Posted by Fotzlid (Post 2730570)

Yes it does. He is currently being charged with a crime and that has to be resolved first. If convicted, he loses his job. If not, then they can try and get him off the force for negligence. If he is fired for negligence first, then how can he adequately defend himself against the legal charges? The department firing him first basically sends the message that he is guilty of the criminal charges without the benefit of a trial.
That is why they suspended him with pay. He is innocent until proven guilty of the legal charges in a court of law. If he is acquitted, then the department can go through their procedures to determine if he gets to keep his job.
The law over-rides departmental policies.


The other driver failed to yield the right of way by crossing 2 lanes and directly into the path of the cruiser. If anything, I'd say the cop was only 50% at fault in this collision.

Originally Posted by Fotzlid (Post 2730565)

The tape clearly shows the Mazda suddenly cut in front of the cruiser. The cruisers brake lights were only one for a second at the most before the collision. Who is more negligent in that case? The speeding officer or the driver that actually caused the crash?
Yes the officer was speeding and the occupants of the other vehicle could have survived a slower collision, but would the collision have occurred if the other driver stayed in his lane?

Originally Posted by Crash victim's lawyer: If cops weren't drag racing, what the hell were they doing? - The Connecticut Post Online

"They are in that intersection for four seconds and had gone almost through it when their car was struck," Halloran said. "If Anderson was even going 84 miles an hour instead of 94, they would have made it."

Originally Posted by Fotzlid (Post 2730644)

The argument about it being at night and difficult to judge is BS. That was a well lit main road. There were 2 cruisers heading towards that oncoming car, one of which was pulling away from the other at a good clip. If you can't judge the speed of the lead cruiser in that situation, you shouldn't be allowed on the road to begin with.

Originally Posted by percy (Post 2730905)

65-70 mph is not that fast. Given that 4 headlights were approaching the intersection, at any rate of speed, tells me the deceased either misjudged the speed of the oncoming cars or simply wasn't paying attention.

Originally Posted by Redlemon (Post 2730919)

I am looking forward to the moment in the trial when the defense attorney looks at either or both of the officers and asks, "What the fuck? Can you give any possible explanation?"

Originally Posted by timalkin (Post 2730939)

Why would the defense attorney ask this question?

Originally Posted by Milford police chief recommends firing officer in fatal crash - The Connecticut Post Online

MILFORD -- Police Chief Keith Mello wants to fire the officer who accidentally killed two Orange teens in June when his cruiser broadsided their car on the Boston Post Road.

The Police Commission will review Mello's recommendation to terminate Officer Jason Anderson, a five-year member of the force, at its Monday night meeting, according to the agenda.

The latest development in the tragic saga of the June 13 Orange crash comes on the heels of the revelation that the teens had been drinking that fatal night, and both apparently had blood-alcohol levels above the legal limit at the time of the accident.

A State Police investigation found Anderson was driving 94 miles per hour when he crashed into the teens, who were traveling in the opposite direction and attempted a left-hand turn onto Dogwood Road in front of his cruiser at roughly 2 a.m.

The officer is charged with two counts of second-degree manslaughter and is free on $250,000 bond while his case is pending in Milford Superior Court. He has been on paid suspension since the crash.

Quoting unnamed sources, the New Haven Register reported Thursday toxicology results show both Ashlie Krakowski and David Servin, who was driving, had blood-alcohol levels of 0.13. Both were 19 years old, but the legal blood-alcohol limit for adults is 0.08. Those figures could not be confirmed.

Krakowski and Servin, who were dating, attended a party in Milford a few hours before the crash, where witnesses reported they were "tipsy" and said they had been playing beer pong.

The party's host, 21-year-old Jaycen Munro, of Heenan Drive in Milford, was charged by State Police last month with providing alcohol to minors.

Sources have also said police found marijuana in the teens' car.

Anderson's New Haven lawyer, Hugh F. Keefe, declined Thursday to comment on the toxicology reports. He said there is a court order preventing their public release.

Jeffrey Meyer, a criminal law professor at Quinnipiac University's School of Law, said even if the teens were considered drunk under the legal standard, it will likely not decrease Anderson's culpability in the case.

"It does not appear to be a game-changer," said Meyer, who had been a federal prosecutor for a decade.

Although the teens' drinking may intensify the tragedy, it doesn't excuse reckless behavior on Anderson's part, he said.

"At the end of the day, the job of police officers is to be keeping an eye out for drunk drivers, not ramming into them at 95 miles per hour for no reason," Meyer said. "It's the police officer, above all, that we expect to be complying with the law, not engaging in joy-riding down public highways."

Although civil law often takes into account "contributory negligence," criminal law doesn't typically allow that defense in cases such as this -- just like an unlocked bank doesn't justify theft, he said.

Lawyers representing the families of Krakowski and Servin, John Wynne and Bart Halloran, respectively, did not return calls requesting comment.

The families have filed notice of their intent to sue Milford and its Police Department.

Anderson and Officer Richard Pisani were heading back to Milford from a mutual-aid call in West Haven on the night of the accident. A video camera installed in Pisani's cruiser recorded both officers speeding far above the posted limit of 40 mph. Pisani accelerated up to 72 mph and was driving at about 65 when Anderson barreled by him on the right, shortly before crashing into the teens.

The Police Commission agenda Monday states the board will also consider "the performance of" Pisani, indicating that he faces departmental charges and discipline, but not termination.

Internal investigations into the conduct of both officers before the crash indicated Pisani, a probationary officer, had not played a role in the crash.

Mello declined to comment until after Monday's meeting.

Anderson's blood-alcohol content was also tested after the crash, showing he had no alcohol in his system.

State police reported that the power control module from the police vehicle indicated that for the nearly nine seconds leading up to the crash, Anderson was pushing the accelerator pedal at 100 percent. Then, six-tenths of a second before impact, he slowed down slightly and hit his brakes.

The Police Commission will meet at 7 p.m. in police headquarters, 430 Boston Post Road.

Originally Posted by Lasereth (Post 2738368)

I wish there were more articles about when the police screw up and DO get fired with no questions asked. But that's not interesting so it doesn't make it on the news.

Originally Posted by MSD (Post 2738496)

Cops rarely get fired with no questions asked. When an investigation takes place and someone is fired with cause, it's usually not newsworthy.

Originally Posted by Milford fires officer in fatal crash - The Connecticut Post Online

Milford fires officer in fatal crash
Board of Police Commissioners suspends 2nd officer 30 days for role in accident that killed 2 Orange teenagers

By Frank Juliano
Staff writer
Updated: 12/14/2009 10:39:54 PM EST

MILFORD -- The Milford police officer who accidentally killed two Orange teens in June when his cruiser broadsided their car on the Boston Post Road lost his job Monday night.

The Board of Police Commissioners fired Jason Anderson, a five-year department veteran, and suspended another officer, Richard Pisani, for 30 days without pay in connection with the incident. The board also extended Pisani's probationary period, due to end in February, for another year.

Anderson and Pisani were heading back to Milford from a mutual-aid call in West Haven on the night of the accident. A video camera installed in Pisani's cruiser recorded both officers speeding far above the posted limit of 40 mph. Pisani accelerated up to 72 mph and was driving at about 65 when Anderson barreled by him on the right, shortly before crashing into the teens.

He has been charged with two counts of second-degree manslaughter and one count of reckless driving, and is free on $250,000 bond. Anderson is next scheduled to appear Jan. 13 in Milford Superior Court. Pisani does not face criminal charges.

Anderson was joined in the packed hearing room by Jeffrey Matchett, a retired Milford police sergeant who is now executive director of Council 15 of the Connecticut Police Unions, and Eric Brown, legal counsel for the association. After the board voted to terminate him, the officer and his brother Richard, a Milford police sergeant, moved through a crowd of family, friends and fellow officers, accepting hugs.

Jason Anderson declined to comment to a reporter.

The commission's action doesn't change a thing, according to the lawyer for the family of David Servin, one of the 19-year-olds who died in the crash. "Whether or not they are fired or suspended is not the issue to me and my clients," attorney Bart Halloran said before the meeting. "I think the chief and the commission have a duty to clarify what the two officers were doing that night."

Witnesses told State Police that the two Milford officers appeared to be drag racing. A State Police investigation found Anderson was driving 94 mph when he crashed into the car carrying Servin and Ashlie Krakowski. The couple was traveling in the opposite direction and attempted a left-hand turn onto Dogwood Road in front of Anderson's cruiser shortly after 2 a.m.

Halloran confirmed that toxicology reports show that Servin's blood alcohol level was 0.13 when he died at the crash scene, far above the 0.02 limit for those under 21 and the 0.08 limit for adults. Although State Police have said that Servin was driving, Halloran and John Wynne, the Krakowski family lawyer, are not sure. They haven't been able to have their experts inspect the car, Halloran said.

"But the (toxicology results) are a red herring anyway," the Servins' lawyer said Monday. "To have someone driving 94 miles an hour in the right lane -- passing someone -- is so far beyond the human experience of making a left turn. We've all made left turns and had it be closer than we wanted because we misjudged the speed. But this guy was going 94 miles an hour -- nothing prepares you for that."

The police commission agreed with Chief Keith Mello's conclusion that both officers violated department policy, particularly the requirement that officers follow posted speed limits when not responding to an emergency.

"I would like to remind everyone that there are 111 police officers in this department who have and will continue to put their safety on the line to protect others," Mello said. "With rare exception, they perform admirably and honorably and they have served this community well for decades."

The difference in the severity of the discipline is partly due to the outcome of the incident, said Sgt. Vaughan Dumas, a department spokesman, and partly because the officers were travelling at different speeds. State statutes treat speeds above 80 mph as reckless driving violations, and below 80 as speeding infractions.

The commission voted unanimously on both officers' discipline, spending 30 minutes reviewing the internal investigation of Anderson and nearly an hour on the report concerning Pisani. Six members voted; Chairman Carleton Giles, a Norwalk police officer, recused himself, citing his professional contact with Council 15 union officials. Labor lawyer Lawrence Sgrignari, of Hamden, represented the city on both matters.

Anderson had been on paid administrative leave since Nov. 10, the date of his arrest. Pisani had been working his regular 4 p.m. to midnight shift while the internal investigation was going on.