Discussions

The exact make and model of police SUV (don't know if it was the same car - do they have multiple SUV's like that one??) pulled a sharp left turn from the right lane of Princess today too - shortly after I had watched this video.  
 
I was only about half a block behind him in the left lane that he cut across, could have turned out very differently if I was going any faster. No signal lights, no lights or sirens.  
 
Just thought it was odd.  
 
Of course, not three blocks later I watched a small white car do the exact same thing.  
 
Maybe it is a case of people out there driving today left their brains at home??

Irie Mon said "Thee Young Man, and Traveller, couldn't agree with you guys more. Public safety is the number one priority, I mean that's what these guys are all about, keeping Brandon safe. I just think that it's possible he had the emergency lights on. When he saw shakenbake stop he turned the lights out not expecting them to just look at the first 10' of the intersection and pull out. I just don't judge until all the facts are in. "

There were absolutely no lights involved AT ALL. I have trimmed this video down from a much longer video and at no point were any lights used. There's no excuse for it, and this is just a case of careless driving.

Irie Mon said "Thee Young Man, and Traveller, couldn't agree with you guys more. Public safety is the number one priority, I mean that's what these guys are all about, keeping Brandon safe. I just think that it's possible he had the emergency lights on. When he saw shakenbake stop he turned the lights out not expecting them to just look at the first 10' of the intersection and pull out. I just don't judge until all the facts are in. "

That makes no sense at all, you would figure that he would have both lights and sirens on as he ENTERED the intersection. Not what you're stating as shutting them off BEFORE he entered. I'm sure if the OP had seen an approaching emergency vehicle with lights and siren coming that person would have stayed in a stopped position until the EV had left. The way it sounds to me the OP came to the intersection saw that there was an approaching police vehicle coming with no announcement being made and entered the intersection under the premise that the police would heed the right of way.

If the police SUV had been responding to a call, which one can only assume they were, they could of atleast turned their lights on for a few seconds to warn the other drivers. I think this was just a case of the cop not paying attention more than anything.

The_Young_Man said "If the police SUV had been responding to a call, which one can only assume they were, they could of atleast turned their lights on for a few seconds to warn the other drivers. I think this was just a case of the cop not paying attention more than anything. "

If The cop had just thrown his lights on for a short time, I would have stopped and waited. I can't read his mind to know what his intentions were. He should have stopped, but didn't.

Omgoodness. Your video is just so scary. Children nearby. Park.  
Same thing happened to me at 26th and Rosser. Same type of vehicle, no lights. Had two children in back seat. Horrors!

Unfortunately if things were reveresed a ticket woulhave been given. As the older Steven Seigal movie title says the city police live by the title 'Above the Law'. Cell phones permanent attached to their ears and more electronics etc on their dashes which I have no idea how they are able to see out the front window.

Irie Mon said "Thee Young Man, and Traveller, couldn't agree with you guys more. Public safety is the number one priority, I mean that's what these guys are all about, keeping Brandon safe. I just think that it's possible he had the emergency lights on. When he saw shakenbake stop he turned the lights out not expecting them to just look at the first 10' of the intersection and pull out. I just don't judge until all the facts are in. "

Irie Mon - you wrote 'don't judge until all the facts are in'...well I'm reading through quickly here but you were not there at all and you assume a possible emergency and lights on that the op may not have seen so you seem to also judge.  
I look at the video I can see a cop car go by that is all...I can't see if the op driver really looked on the right side after making a stop (possibly did & thinking the cop will stop too) and I can't see what the cop was seeing either.  
To a comment regarding a kids park right there well yes I am assuming here too but I can trust cops will look their surrounding, driving by fast does not mean the driver (cop or not) isn't looking around.  
At least in my experience (as a driver or a pedestrian) when a cop cut you off they don't all sudden slow down and sit in your face.  
I doubt the cop will have hit the car he/she knew will have time to quickly drive by I can do it but will cost me a ticket though if caught.  
The op will probably gain nothing showing this to the cop station. Right now they don't know who the op is just leave as is.  
My only 2 cents long comment here.

First off I'm glad to see that it looks like nobody, OP or officer, were hurt.  
 
This kind of discussion is tricky. On one hand you have a video that shows a situation where it does appear that a driver could have been in a dangerous spot had they not been fully alert. It'd be hard to speak in support of a situation where an accident could have occurred. On the other we only have and may only ever have one side of this, and may never know the nature of the call that we can assume was being responded to which might at the least put this further into context.  
 
On a results level in this particular case I would personally have a level of trust that the Police when in possession of the video would do whatever might be appropriate when taking in all info. As far as this thread, so long as it doesn't give way to general broad brush strokes cop bashing/lame Tim Hortons jokes/etc there may at the least be opportunity to learn about the role of Police, the boundaries they work within, and how where reasonable we can best cooperate with each other on roadways and in the community to ensure safety and ensure that Police have best possible opportunity to do what it is we entrust them to do. I do think it's fair as a driver to at the least want further understanding on when one could expect to see sirens turned on when a Police vehicle is having to clear an intersection out of normal expected turn, understand what exceptions there might be, what cues to look for if there are exceptions and how prepared the driver of the Police vehicle might be to slam on the brakes if other vehicles don't notice them coming through. If someone could speak to any of the above it would be helpful.  
 
Edit: doesn't necessarily speak to this exact situation, but perspective from not far away in Saskatoon on the delicate tightrope Police sometimes have to walk when it comes to using sirens:  
http://copsandbloggers.ca/police-lights-sirens-what-purpose-do-they-serve/  
 
Edited by Adam, 2017-09-04 22:51:47

the op is has the right of way. As you can see in the video they have come to a complete stop at the 3 way. The police vehicle is said to be coming from the right but has no indication that there is an emergency. Yes the op says they can see the police SUV but the police Suv can also see th op's vehicle as it is not a blind intersection. As the op enters the intersection the police chooses not to stop or give any indication of an emergency siren or otherwise to inform the op of their intention to not at the intersection. I believe this to be recklessness on the part of the officer and placing the op and possibly others in the vehicle in harms way. This video should be reviewed by BPS and disciplinary action taken.

looking at video again to say that the cop almost hit the OP driver not so much I can see by the way the cop car drove by he/she did not really make a proper stop but it does not look the cop car almost hit the driver by inch not even that close and the OP driver was not in complete finish left turn by the time the cop car went by. I find it is little exaggeration to say a cop almost hit me but yes can say the cop did not make a complete stop.  
I really doubt that cops are bad drivers I am sure he/she saw the OP at the corner and saw no kids in the park they have eyes they watch. Some drivers do not make a stop or miss a stop do not look this cop did check. Hey I could be wrong but I doubt they pack themselves with drugs, pills, or alcohol before their work shift.  
I see at times drivers do not get out of the way when a cop car is coming with sirens in emergency which drivers are supposed to do so why pick on little things like this situation. You never know when one day you really will need their help and come to your rescue you sure will be happy to see them.

If the car in the video was not a police car would this thread even exist?  
 
Not likely!  
 
Police officers are people too, they make mistakes and they are human. Nobody was hurt so let's just all move on and put your pitchforks away lol

RC123 said "If the car in the video was not a police car would this thread even exist?     Not likely!     Police officers are people too, they make mistakes and they are human. Nobody was hurt so let's just all move on and put your pitchforks away lol "

Like people earlier on have said, we all make mistakes but deserve to be called out on them. If I had made this mistake it would have ended up costing me hundreds of dollars.

plus zero said "looking at video again to say that the cop almost hit the OP driver not so much I can see by the way the cop car drove by he/she did not really make a proper stop but it does not look the cop car almost hit the driver by inch not even that close and the OP driver was not in complete finish left turn by the time the cop car went by. I find it is little exaggeration to say a cop almost hit me but yes can say the cop did not make a complete stop.   I really doubt that cops are bad drivers I am sure he/she saw the OP at the corner and saw no kids in the park they have eyes they watch. Some drivers do not make a stop or miss a stop do not look this cop did check. Hey I could be wrong but I doubt they pack themselves with drugs, pills, or alcohol before their work shift.   I see at times drivers do not get out of the way when a cop car is coming with sirens in emergency which drivers are supposed to do so why pick on little things like this situation. You never know when one day you really will need their help and come to your rescue you sure will be happy to see them. "

No one here is bashing cops, but if I had not of noticed the cop running the sign when I did, it would have absolutely ended in an accident. The cop didn't even slow down for the sign, he was going much too fast to have time to stop if I had pulled out anyway. That's why it's a near miss.  
 
Edited by Shakenbake, 2017-09-05 10:52:29

vehicles still have to obey the traffic act unless in an emergency situation. In which case they have sirens and lights to alert traffic and people around them. I would definitely take this footage to the station and ask to speak to a supervisor. All officers need to obey the rules. If they were responding to a call and it was not serious enough for sirens and lights then they need to stop or at least lights and make everyone around aware they intend to speed through a stop sign. I think instances like this are what give our police force a bad name. Painting with that broad brush. I have seen 5 and six cruisers w/ 10 to 12 officers run a check stop. Excessive. I have seen cruisers sit in the middle of 18th street facing backward to run plates. You still have to follow the highway traffic act. I have called the station about items before. Public perception is important. Public relations is important. I don't think we see enough of the good stuff with our force in Brandon. They always have to be aware of how they are perceived. Some officers don't gauge perception well in my opinion. Was there not a survey circulated in the last year to gauge perception things such as these?

This is right from the class 4 drivers manual: -Emergency vehicles  
When responding to an emergency call emergency  
vehicle drivers can exceed the posted speed limits or  
proceed past a red traffic control signal light or stop  
sign. They must, however, sound an audible signal  
bell or siren and show a flashing red or a combination  
of flashing red and blue lights.  
Emergency vehicle drivers must drive with regard for  
safety, and must consider the:  
• condition and use of the highway  
• amount of traffic that is on or may be expected  
on the highway  
• nature and use being made of the emergency  
vehicle at the time  
Now to say maybe they responding to a call and sirens would have told them police coming and they wanted a stealthy arrival, i understand that , but no red and blue lights ..... clearly we still need IIA watching our police .... sad as that is ...

Has this video been shown to the police yet? I'm curious what they will have to say.

Yes, we all make mistakes, cops included, but does that excuse work in traffic court? Will the judge drop a ticket because you are human and made a mistake? No? (insert shocked gasp)  
 
This should be treated like any traffic violation (as there were no lights or sirens seen in video), and the offender would get a traffic violation which would have to be fought/ paid in court. With increases to license renewal fees, insurance, etc to follow, just like anybody else that makes a mistake on camera.  
 
I am not trying to hold the police up to a higher standard, just up to the same standard that the rest of us have to follow.

anonymous11111 said "Yes, we all make mistakes, cops included, but does that excuse work in traffic court? Will the judge drop a ticket because you are human and made a mistake? No? (insert shocked gasp)     This should be treated like any traffic violation (as there were no lights or sirens seen in video), and the offender would get a traffic violation which would have to be fought/ paid in court. With increases to license renewal fees, insurance, etc to follow, just like anybody else that makes a mistake on camera.     I am not trying to hold the police up to a higher standard, just up to the same standard that the rest of us have to follow. "

more often than not, violators get their traffic charges dropped or reduced due to a variety of ridiculous excuses in traffic court. So yes, Judges drop tickets because people are human and make mistakes (insert shocked gasp), it happens ALL the time!

anonymous11111 said "Yes, we all make mistakes, cops included, but does that excuse work in traffic court? Will the judge drop a ticket because you are human and made a mistake? No? (insert shocked gasp)     This should be treated like any traffic violation (as there were no lights or sirens seen in video), and the offender would get a traffic violation which would have to be fought/ paid in court. With increases to license renewal fees, insurance, etc to follow, just like anybody else that makes a mistake on camera.     I am not trying to hold the police up to a higher standard, just up to the same standard that the rest of us have to follow. "

I have watched this video several times and I do believe the officer just missed seeing the stop sign. The officer may or may not have been responding to a call and may have been distracted trying to read what was on the mobile computer, missing the stop sign completely. The reason I say that is because I believe the officer missed seeing shakenbake pulling out in front of the cruiser as well. I am not seeing any attempt to slow down or even swerve to the right as shakenbake pull out. Brandon Police cruisers all have GPS and all can be read in real time by supervisors and most cruisers have video. I am still not rushing to judge without all the facts, but I do think this needs to be reviewed by BPS management.  
 
Yes police are just human just like the rest of us buy they DO need to be held to a higher standard. They are in the public eye and they need to put the cell phones down, wear seatbelts, and they need to come to a full and complete stop at every stop sign unless they are on an emergency call.  
 
Congratulations to shakenbake BTW. The video shows a full and complete stop at that stop sign. One of the few people in Brandon that do this. Congrats.

Irie Mon said "    anonymous11111 said "Yes, we all make mistakes, cops included, but does that excuse work in traffic court? Will the judge drop a ticket because you are human and made a mistake? No? (insert shocked gasp)     This should be treated like any traffic violation (as there were no lights or sirens seen in video), and the offender would get a traffic violation which would have to be fought/ paid in court. With increases to license renewal fees, insurance, etc to follow, just like anybody else that makes a mistake on camera.     I am not trying to hold the police up to a higher standard, just up to the same standard that the rest of us have to follow. " I have watched this video several times and I do believe the officer just missed seeing the stop sign. The officer may or may not have been responding to a call and may have been distracted trying to read what was on the mobile computer, missing the stop sign completely. The reason I say that is because I believe the officer missed seeing shakenbake pulling out in front of the cruiser as well. I am not seeing any attempt to slow down or even swerve to the right as shakenbake pull out. Brandon Police cruisers all have GPS and all can be read in real time by supervisors and most cruisers have video. I am still not rushing to judge without all the facts, but I do think this needs to be reviewed by BPS management.     Yes police are just human just like the rest of us buy they DO need to be held to a higher standard. They are in the public eye and they need to put the cell phones down, wear seatbelts, and they need to come to a full and complete stop at every stop sign unless they are on an emergency call.     Congratulations to shakenbake BTW. The video shows a full and complete stop at that stop sign. One of the few people in Brandon that do this. Congrats. "

For putting people's lives in danger. If this had not been for the quick thinking of the op to apply the brakes when they had this would had ended up badly for them. so what would the excuse be for the officer in court? "I was just doing my job" even though part of the job would be to warn others when entering the intersection which was not done. You make too many assumptions for an incident that was handled wrong. distracted driving carries a huge penalty as well....so far this is not looking to good for that officer.

Didn't make a complete stop. Once you stop your suppose to wait 3 seconds. The video clearly shows you only stopped from 7 seconds to 8 seconds. So not even a whole second. You can't judge the cop if you didn't follow the rules either

Police vehicles operating without siren  
 
64(1) Where, considering the circumstances, it is reasonable and safe to do so, a peace officer driving a motor vehicle may, in carrying out the peace officer’s duties, do one or more of the following while not operating a siren:  
 
(a) drive the motor vehicle in excess of the speed limit:  
 
(b) proceed past a traffic control signal indicating stop or a stop sign without stopping:  
 
(c) contravene any other provision that is prescribed by the Act, this or other regulations or a municipal bylaw governing the use of the highways.  
 
(2) Where, considering the circumstances, it is reasonable and safe, a peace officer may, in carrying out the peace officer’s duties, park a motor vehicle, while not operating any flashing lights or siren, contrary to any provision that is prescribed by the Act, this or other regulations or a municipal bylaw governing the parking of motor vehicles.  
 
EDIT: These sections do not give the police carte blanche to drive however they want. They're still subject to civil liability if they cause damages while driving without their sirens negligently:  
 
Nevertheless, these special privileges do not absolve police officers from liability in every circumstance. The allowance and privileges to emergency vehicles are still subject to the consideration of all the “circumstances” which, without limitation, I define to i:nclude: weather, topography, traffic, the nature of the emergency, the number of emergency responders thought to be en-route or at the scene, and so on. Officers will be civilly liable if, considering all the circumstances, they are negligent. Officers can break statutes or municipal laws referred in the [legislation] only if it is reasonable and safe to do so in the circumstances. See e.g. Use of Highway and Rules of the Road Regulation, Alta. Reg. 304/2002, ss. 62 - 65. (Alford v. Canada, 2010 ABQB 192 at para 30)

loeog said "Police vehicles operating without siren     64(1) Where, considering the circumstances, it is reasonable and safe to do so, a peace officer driving a motor vehicle may, in carrying out the peace officer’s duties, do one or more of the following while not operating a siren:     (a) drive the motor vehicle in excess of the speed limit:     (b) proceed past a traffic control signal indicating stop or a stop sign without stopping:     (c) contravene any other provision that is prescribed by the Act, this or other regulations or a municipal bylaw governing the use of the highways.     (2) Where, considering the circumstances, it is reasonable and safe, a peace officer may, in carrying out the peace officer’s duties, park a motor vehicle, while not operating any flashing lights or siren, contrary to any provision that is prescribed by the Act, this or other regulations or a municipal bylaw governing the parking of motor vehicles.     EDIT: These sections do not give the police carte blanche to drive however they want. They're still subject to civil liability if they cause damages while driving without their sirens negligently:     Nevertheless, these special privileges do not absolve police officers from liability in every circumstance. The allowance and privileges to emergency vehicles are still subject to the consideration of all the “circumstances” which, without limitation, I define to i:nclude: weather, topography, traffic, the nature of the emergency, the number of emergency responders thought to be en-route or at the scene, and so on. Officers will be civilly liable if, considering all the circumstances, they are negligent. Officers can break statutes or municipal laws referred in the [legislation] only if it is reasonable and safe to do so in the circumstances. See e.g. Use of Highway and Rules of the Road Regulation, Alta. Reg. 304/2002, ss. 62 - 65. (Alford v. Canada, 2010 ABQB 192 at para 30) "

Isnt The Manitoba Highway Traffic Act different from the Alberta one? Sorry just wondering as i would think this doesnt really apply to Manitoba law as u says its Alberta ... isnt each Province different? Either way what if that police officer had hit that person then would you still say the police can do whatever? What if that vehicle was insted a little girl crossing the street to get to that park, is it then ok for the police to break the laws (even if they just traffice laws)?

Tracy16 said "Didn't make a complete stop. Once you stop your suppose to wait 3 seconds. The video clearly shows you only stopped from 7 seconds to 8 seconds. So not even a whole second. You can't judge the cop if you didn't follow the rules either "

Well what's worse? A driver only stopping at a stop sign for 1 second instead of 3, or a cop blowing through a stop sign at a intersection when there is clearly a vehicle entering that intersection? Most drivers in this city just slow down at a stop sign and never come to a complete stop. What the cop did was way worse and dangerous.

Was this incident ever reported to police?

Sorry, no rules broken.  
 
Unless your suggesting the officer was just out for a joy ride and not a residential break and entry, the officer was doing his/her job.  
 
On the other hand, if you feel the officer was just out for a joy ride, I suggest you go straight to the front desk and demand to see the chief of police. GOOD LUCK WITH THIS  
 
Edited by loeog, 2017-09-07 21:13:26

loeog said "Sorry, no rules broken.     Unless your suggesting the officer was just out for a joy ride and not a residential break and entry, the officer was doing his/her job.     On the other hand, if you feel the officer was just out for a joy ride, I suggest you go straight to the front desk and demand to see the chief of police. GOOD LUCK WITH THIS     Edited by loeog, 2017-09-07 21:13:26"

your saying we should have ESP to know what the police officer is doing?  
 
The officer still needs to proceed with caution through traffic control devices. They may know they are proceeding to a call, but others don't, weather another driver or pedestrian. How are other drivers suppose to know weather the officer approaching the stop sign or red light is responding to a call without lights and sirens?  
 
The full text of 106 in the Manitoba HTA.  
 
'EMERGENCY VEHICLES  
Operation of emergency vehicles  
106(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Part, but subject to subsections (2), (3) and (4),  
(a) the driver of an emergency vehicle:  
(b) a peace officer driving a vehicle:  
(b.1) the driver of any vehicle  
(i) who is accompanied by a peace officer or is driving a vehicle that is escorted by a vehicle driven by a peace officer, or  
(ii) that is carrying first aid or rescue equipment:  
when responding to an emergency or when in pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, may  
(c) exceed the speed limit:  
(d) proceed past a traffic control signal showing a red light or a stop or arrêt signal without stopping:  
(e) disregard rules and traffic control devices governing direction of movement or turning in specified directions: and  
(f) stop or stand.  
Requirements respecting emergency vehicles  
106(2) Subject to subsection (3), the driver of a vehicle to which subsection (1) applies shall not exercise the privileges granted under that subsection unless  
(a) the driver is sounding the horn or siren: and  
(b) if the vehicle is an emergency vehicle, it is equipped with lighting that complies with section 38.1 for that type of emergency vehicle and the lighting is illuminated.  
Application of subsection (2)  
106(3) Subsection (2) does not apply where compliance therewith  
(a) is unnecessary: or  
(b) would inhibit a driver in responding to an emergency or in apprehending an actual or suspected violator of the law:  
and the driver is proceeding with due regard for the safety of other persons using the highway.  
Safety requirements  
106(4) The driver of a vehicle to which subsection (1) applies, when exercising any of the privileges granted under that subsection, shall drive with due regard for safety having regard to all the circumstances of the case.  
106(5) and (6) [Repealed] S.M. 1996, c. 26, s. 12.  
Prohibitions re use of sirens and emergency lighting  
106(7) Subject to subsection (2), the driver of an emergency vehicle on a highway shall not sound the siren or illuminate any of the forms of lighting described in section 38.1 unless the vehicle is responding to an emergency or is in pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law.  
Exception to subsection (7)  
106(7.1) Subsection (7) does not apply to  
(a) a vehicle used by a peace officer in connection with the exercise of his or her powers under section 76 or 76.1:  
(b) an emergency vehicle used in a parade, special event or in a public demonstration of the use of its equipment.  
Obligation of emergency motor vehicle drivers  
106(8) Nothing in this section or in subsection 35(11.1) shall be construed  
(a) as permitting the driver of a motor vehicle described in subsection (1) to operate or park the motor vehicle in a negligent manner: or  
(b) as relieving the driver of a motor vehicle described in subsection (1) from complying with subsection (2) or subsection 35(11) while pursuing another motor vehicle driven by a person who is attempting to avoid apprehension.  
S.M. 1987-88, c. 23, s. 9.1: S.M. 1991-92, c. 25, s. 36 and 37: S.M. 1996, c. 26, s. 12.  
Testing speedometers  
107 Notwithstanding anything in this Part, a peace officer may exceed the speed limit while operating a motor vehicle for the purpose of testing the accuracy of the speedometer on the motor vehicle by means of a speed timing device.'  
 
http://web2.gov.mb.ca/laws/statutes/ccsm/h060e.php#106

Police need to draw a fine line when it comes to protecting the citizen they serve.  
These public servants are willing to protect both the haters and the people that respect the work they do.  
 
This officer was probably responding to a citizen in need, if you think the officer acted in a dangerous way, report them.  
 
Personally, I think the video proves the OP wasn't paying much attention. If the OP saw the car before they entered the intersection, they are suggesting they seen a speeding vehicle heading towards an intersection and decided to race it to the lane.

loeog said "Police need to draw a fine line when it comes to protecting the citizen they serve.   These public servants are willing to protect both the haters and the people that respect the work they do.     This officer was probably responding to a citizen in need, if you think the officer acted in a dangerous way, report them.     Personally, I think the video proves the OP wasn't paying much attention. If the OP saw the car before they entered the intersection, they are suggesting they seen a speeding vehicle heading towards an intersection and decided to race it to the lane. "

Are you okay in the head? The LAW has been quoted here numerous times. If you have a job to enforce the laws, then you obviously should know how to follow it. I obviously was paying attention due to the fact I was able to stop for a cop going in excess of 50km/h through a 3-way. There was no racing. The cop wasn't even in the frame of the video, and the video even shows how quickly the cop had moved down the street after I turned the corner. You can't seem to quote any law. This is the opposite of protecting citizens. It's public endangerment.