We had to drive somewhere around 8 a.m. We neglected to check ahead of time, and found the entrance ramps blocked by police vehicles and traffic stationary. The radio said the entire 3 lanes of westbound traffic had been blocked for over 2 hrs as police “investigated.”
(For those familiar w/ the area or who wish to Google, westbound 290, near York and North. We were blocked from getting on at St Charles.)
We were readily able to find an alternate route, so no big deal for us. But I don’t understand what police would need to investigate for a number of hours, which would warrant inconveniencing thousands of people/businesses during the Monday rush hour.
The only thing I could come up with was if a shooting had been involved (tho this is near Chicago - unlikely given this W suburban location) or if police were investigating some other serious crime. But it still seemed like an awful lot of disruption.
If the wreckage was strewn across most (or all) of the lanes, that was likely one of the contributing factors to the full closure. My understanding is that, particularly in the case of an accident in which there may be criminal charges made (i.e., a fatality, DUI, etc.), the police have to fully document the accident scene before they can start clearing the wreckage out of the traffic lanes. (And, if injured people are pinned inside of cars, the extraction may delay the investigation.)
Thanks. I guess I’m trying to figure out and weigh the various public interests here. The interest in thoroughly documenting the situation for a potential criminal prosecution, versus allowing thousands of people to travel on a public roadway. I also realize danger to police and such is increased if traffic is allowed to flow.
And I’m guessing, that includes loads of pictures, statements from witnesses that stuck around, measuring skid marks documenting how far away debris was thrown etc. Plus, how much time is spent waiting for whoever investigates major accidents to show up? I’m assuming the first cops to show up on the scene are there more as first responders and dealing with traffic. I’d guess that they have accident investigators or high patrol come in and take the reports on something this major.
Also, keep in mind that even with a small accident, you often wind up with fluids on the roadway. They’re going to have the fire department come out and deal with that. Even if they know it just coolant, the cops aren’t likely to get people drive through it and obviously they’re going to keep everyone plenty far away if there’s gas running across the road.
Or said another way, the interest in documenting situation for potential prosecution of an action that led to serious injury or death vs. inconveniencing people who are traveling that highway.
I grumble as loud as anyone when stuck in the gridlock, but it shouldn’t be a close decision.
Investigating car accidents is probably as old as car accidents themselves. they have to know who’s at fault and if there will be charges laid and against whom.
And the time spent investigating the causes so that those causes can be eliminated in the future, benefiting every single one of us. Seat belts, airbags, better signage, road design, road maintenance , etc. This and all the other reasons are worth my time and inconvenience.
In defense of police officers (which is rare for me), I doubt very much they enjoy being at an accident scene for an entire shift to avoid anything. Lots of other creative ways to do that which taxpayers can’t see.
A routine accident with no or minor injuries just needs a good eyeballing.
A collision involving death, serious bodily injury and/or criminal charges (not just DWI) involve a lot more. Our fatal accident team (of whom I used to be one) do a full scale diagram of the scene rather than a not to scale sketch. The scale diagram is done by using laser mapping for precise measurements of the entire scene. It takes a long time. If it’s a large scene it takes even longer.
It is actually a really shitty way to spend a shift. They get cleared as soon as possible.
Hmm - I’m a tad surprised that I’m the only one who questions the balancing of this equation. I wonder how many of the 100s/1000s of people stuck on that road give a shit about what crimes are brought to bear as the result of this incident.
I read a later article - says a semi failed to reduce speed, crashed into a Buick, killing the Buick’s driver. Lanes (did not say how many) remained closed until noon. They had already been closed for 2 hrs around 8 a.m.
So whose interests are we concerned with? The interest of the friends/family of the Buick driver, WRT seeing the truck driver/employer/truck owner/builder criminally liable? Do any of you have any experience as to what percentage of criminal prosecutions really turn on a 2+ hr, vs a <1 hr investigation? I specify criminal prosecutions, because I’m not sure how much police action ought to be performed to protect the rights of potential civil litigants.
My suspicion is that this is an instance in which someone came up with a standard procedure to be followed in each and every instance, with no consideration of specific circumstances. Which is how bureaucracies often work, but not IMO always desireable.
I’m somewhat dubious as to whether someone getting in an accident in clear weather during the daylight on a heavily travelled road s likely to result in meaningful safety benefits. But I grant others may believe differently.
As driving is a part of my job daily, I see plenty of wrecks on the freeway. Mostly what holds up traffic is police, ambulance, firetruck (if called to the scene) being there and having to park somewhere right by the accident. Often this is in what would otherwise be a moving lane of traffic. After all the injuries are seen to, and statements taken and everything is documented, depending on circumstances, it might take a bit to get the vehicles and debris and any spilled fluids cleared off the road. Usually, the officer(s) in charge are working as quickly as possible to get things moving as quickly and safely as possible. They don’t like being in the middle of the freeway any more than you do, dealing with a hazardous situation.
A person died. The family will want to collect compensation from the truck driver’s insurance company and/or employer. Without a sufficiently detailed investigation, there will be too many unanswered questions to establish (or challenge) liability. I rely on police investigations like this routinely in my work. A good scene investigation will yield tons of valuable evidence, much of it impossible to recreate if not done immediately.
Oneof these days the so-called “smart roads” will know the IDs of every vehicle on them.
We could then balance the interests by sending a bill for the wasted time of the folks stuck in traffic during the investigation phase to whoever is finally adjudged responsible for the accident. So a couple months after sitting in traffic you’d get a check for a couple hundred bucks. And so would everyone else inconvenienced that morning.
I’ve long liked the idea of making people far more responsible for their negative externalities. Especially those caused by incompetence or bad citizenship.
Only a cop could answer this, but if there is an accident that has shut down a road (and they are not waiting on Medevac) it might be because there is a strong suspicion that the accident was the result of a crime?
.
“Sarge, I get why there is shattered glass all over the road… and plastic shards from the bumpers… and shards of rubber from tires. But why would a Suburban be leaking .380 and 9mm brass all over the road for 3 miles?”
Which goes to my question - I imagine the answer is that it is considered good public policy to have the police perform this function to allow persons/corporations involved to potentially benefit from insurance or civil litigation. Or thinking that it is in society’s best interest to have the insurance and civil litigation systems run effectively.
I’m sure I’m looking at this incorrectly, but that sorta seems as though the police are acting on behalf of specific private individuals’/corporations’ financial interest. Perhaps it is little different from the filing of a police report after a burglary in order to file an insurance claim.
The magnitude of the closure/inconvenience just really impressed me. Living in/around Chicago all my life, I’m accustomed to bad traffic. This was way beyond that. I guess if it were my spouse/child who were killed - or who was driving the truck - I’d want SOME degree of investigation, but I’m not sure how much cost my interest ought to impose on how many people.
I readily acknowledge that if the cops do not perform that investigation, it will be impossible to recreate later.
I’m sure this is too simplistic, but a truck crashes into a car in heavy traffic. Someone (likely several someones) stuck in that traffic behind the crash was a front row witness. Either the truck did something wrong, or the car did, or they both did. Or maybe there was equipment failure. Plenty of time to take breath/blood samples for drugs/alcohol. How much and what kind of evidence would elude a good thorough video of the scene, then cleaning things up and moving the vehicles to the side of the road as quickly as reasonably possible? How much would this sort of evidence affect eventual insurance claims/civil litigation?
It’s hard to know what’s important until much later. I get as impatient as the next guy stuck in traffic, but we really do rely on those investigations, including precise measurements, videos, photos, collection of debris, etc.
Now that we’re also getting body cam videos, I can also tell you that they do seem to be taking their time and not too worried about the traffic backed up. Maybe if they really hustled, a 6 hour closure could be reduced to 3 or 4 hours.
As has been already noted, accident investigation isn’t only a matter of evidence that might be used in a civil lawsuit stemming from the incident; it’s also evidence that will be used in criminal charges (and, as someone died in today’s collision, the driver of the truck likely will be facing significant criminal charges).
Yes, it’s inconvenient as hell for drivers on that road, who want to (and maybe need to) be places. I’ve been stuck in such traffic jams, I get it. As has already been noted, collecting such evidence needs to be more thorough than what you acknowledge is a “too simplistic” view of what needs to be done. If it so happens that the evidence from the wreck only impacts one lane of the expressway, it’s probably possible for the police to open up at least some lanes for traffic to use while the investigation is underway, but if the evidence is spread most or all lanes, that may simply not be possible right away.
And, such investigation likely has to, at least in part, wait until the medical and safety issues involved at the scene of the wreck have been addressed.
I’m an administrative law judge - w/ NO knowledge of criminal matters. But in adjudicating the cases that come before me, probably 95% of 95% of the cases turn on a limited number of sorta broad facts if you flip yes or no on those main factors, everything else will not change the outcome (yes or no), and will likely have only a minimal impact on secondary aspects of the outcome.
I suspect the vast majority of criminal cases are quite similar. Pretty gross factors will determine guilt or innocence, w/ precious little turning on whether a screw was found 1/4 mile back up the road.
Full disclosure, I’m likely influenced by my reaction to a couple of other sorts of "inconveniences. Such as the security theater in airports inconveniencing millions form negligible if any payoff. Or when I used to commute by train. Every once in a while some idiot would jump in front of the train And the entire line would shut down. Well, 100% of the time, the train was where IT was supposed to be…
Yeah, I’m down to just vague bitching - which is really silly since, as I admitted, I was not more than minimally inconvenienced.
I’m sure I’m looking at this incorrectly, but that sorta seems as though the police are acting on behalf of specific private individuals’/corporations’ financial interest. Perhaps it is little different from the filing of a police report after a burglary in order to file an insurance claim.
[/quote]
I wasn’t killed but that much expert attention and attendance was needed to established so the other driver could be cited as !00% at fault and my medical expenses could be paid by his insurance (they far exceeded my policy). Mind you, I’m only getting expenses I ave paid out, nothing for ears of lost wages nor pain and suffering for my life as I knew it being snatched from me by someone else’s negligence and recklessness. I will never be the same again, nor be able to work to maintain the modest standard of living I had. To say nothing of future medical medical expenses. So, no, I don’t believe undue time or effort wa given to my accident. You won’t either if it happens to you or a loved one. I hope it doesn’t.
I’m sure I’m looking at this incorrectly, but that sorta seems as though the police are acting on behalf of specific private individuals’/corporations’ financial interest. Perhaps it is little different from the filing of a police report after a burglary in order to file an insurance claim.
[/quote]
I wasn’t killed but that much expert attention and attendance was needed to established so the other driver could be cited as !00% at fault and my medical expenses could be paid by his insurance (they far exceeded my policy). Mind you, I’m only getting expenses I ave paid out, nothing for ears of lost wages nor pain and suffering for my life as I knew it being snatched from me by someone else’s negligence and recklessness. I will never be the same again, nor be able to work to maintain the modest standard of living I had. To say nothing of future medical medical expenses. So, no, I don’t believe undue time or effort wa given to my accident. You won’t either if it happens to you or a loved one. I hope it doesn’t.
I wasn’t killed but that much expert attention and attendance was needed to establish causation so the other driver could be cited as !00% at fault and my medical expenses could be paid by his insurance (they far exceeded my policy). Mind you, I’m only getting expenses I ave paid out, nothing for ears of lost wages nor pain and suffering for my life as I knew it being snatched from me by someone else’s negligence and recklessness. I will never be the same again, nor be able to work to maintain the modest standard of living I had. To say nothing of future medical medical expenses. So, no, I don’t believe undue time or effort wa given to my accident. You won’t either if it happens to you or a loved one. I hope it never does.
I’m sure this is too simplistic, but a truck crashes into a car in heavy traffic. Someone (likely several someones) stuck in that traffic behind the crash was a front row witness. Either the truck did something wrong, or the car did, or they both did.
I doubt that this accident happened in heavy traffic - sure , it might be a heavily traveled road, but the accident happened at 6:45 am. Heavy traffic doesn’t usually result in fatal accidents. And there may not be any witnesses - even if there were vehicles behind the two in the crash, that doesn’t mean anyone actually saw what caused the crash. Or there may not have been anything to see- there was a stretch limo crash in NYS a couple of years ago that killed about 20 people( two of whom weren’t even in the vehicle). The cause of the crash was deficient brakes - but that apparently wasn’t the only issue. There was also something about how the limo was stretched , falsified repairs , improper registration/plates, the driver not having the proper license. But all anybody saw was the limo speeding down the road - they wouldn’t have been able to tell if the driver had tried to stop. I don’t know how long the road was closed - I’m guessing for at least four or five hours since the investigation took days . But I don’t really have a problem with closing the road for 5 or 10 or even 24 hours before charging the limo owner with 20 counts each of criminally negligent homicide and second-degree manslaughter. After all, if he doesn’t get arrested/charged/convicted because the investigation isn’t thorough enough that’s not much of a deterrent to him or anyone else inclined to cut corners.