Blockade vehicles

[opsoverkill]

Bravo to the captain for standing up for his men!! And for the public to recognize it.

Hey...
MO. FIRE CAPT WINS AFTER "APPARATUS BLOCKING" ON-SCENE ARREST: Federal court jurors awarded $17,500 yesterday to a Fire Captain arrested by a Hazelwood cop in a dispute over where the fire apparatus was parked during a 2003 car crash rescue. Juror Betsy Vennemann said after the verdict, "We wanted to make a statement that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated."

Capt. David Wilson won $7,500 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in punitive damages. Jurors, including a nun, said they went easy on the defendant, Officer Todd Greeves, because he has a family and they weren't sure who would pay the costs. Fire Captain Wilson testified that the Robertson FPD apparatus was parked in a way to protect rescuers working to free a victim from wreckage along I-270. Greeves ordered that the truck be moved to accommodate passing traffic and arrested Wilson for ignoring him. Wilson was released after 23 minutes and never charged. He sued, claiming civil rights violations that opened him to anxiety and humiliation. Greeves told the court the truck was creating a hazard and not adding to safety at the scene. Jurors interviewed after the verdict said their feeling about Greeves was reinforced during the punitive phase of the trial, when they heard there had been other complaints about him. An internal affairs investigation determined that Greeves used excessive force in a 2002 arrest, court documents show, and was the subject of several other complaints. Before Wednesday's deliberations, U.S. Magistrate Judge Mary Ann Medler had already ruled that Greeves had no probable cause to arrest Fire Captain Wilson, who she said had state law on his side. She also dismissed the City of Hazelwood as a defendant. "The whole police and fire communities have been watching this case," said Bevis Schock, one of Wilson's lawyers. "Everybody wanted to know who controls the fire scene."
Greeves' lawyer, Peter Dunne, said he was disappointed in the verdict and the discussion of the other complaints against Greeves. Dunne also said it was unfair to suggest that Greeves did not care about the firefighters' safety. Dunne said that the city's insurance would not pay for the costs and that the issue is "complicated." Schock said he thinks the insurance probably would pay the compensatory damages, and possibly the punitive. Also at issue is payment of unspecified lawyers' fees.
Another lesson for fire & cops to get together before the next run...and figure out the laws and rules-and develop the plans... so everyone knows who will do what when operating on the roadways.

[papacheese]

This is always a topic which never fails to get my blood boiling.....that keeping a roadway open is more important than the safety of our troops. No matter how you try to justify the reasoning, it simply doesn't wash. I think we have a responsibilty NOT to block things unnecessarily, but absolutely have the justification to place our apparatus in a position that best protects the firefighters. Maybe the cops need to see a few of the videos we've put out there to understand the risks, then visit the injured firefighter in the hospital. As for the motoring public, they can wait...

[wellingcountry]

Papacheese you are absolutely correct. A few weeks ago we where dispatched to and MVA on Route 206 as we were arriving I found a trooper car stooped right in the middle of the roadway with no warning devices on. As I was giving my report of one vehicle in the roadway the car began to move and as I looked in the car there was the trooper moving the vehicle onto a side road. The driver of the quint then took the shoulder of the road as the other vehicle was partially on the shoulder and the lawn of the shopping center. We got out to investigate and the trooper immediately began telling to driver of the quint to get the truck out of the roadway. Mind you know we are on the shoulder. The driver ignored him the best he could and kept telling him no until the point came when the trooper said to him to come here and get that FXXXing fire truck out of the roadway we don't need you here. At that time he informed me of this and with finding no injuries I recalled the assignment. As for you said it is becoming pretty ridiculous that we can not even have a fire truck on the shoulder of the road protecting out own guys. My personal feeling on it is that if I can not have the crews and myself protected then we are going to leave the scene. Within reason of course!! But I am glad to see that someone has finally seen the light that the trucks are there to protect us and not to cause traffic problems.

[thelurker]

papacheese said:

Maybe the cops need to see a few of the videos we've put out there to understand the risks, then visit the injured firefighter in the hospital. As for the motoring public, they can wait...

Chief, I might be wrong, but I think they have more hit on the road each year than we do. If anyone knows how fast things can go to shit on the side of the highway, it's them. I don't think showing them videos or visiting injured people in the hospital will do anything. I feel there needs to be a push to make; The 2008 Update of 23 CFR Part 634, requiring "Public Safety Vests," Break Away Vest Features, vehicle chevrons, and ambulance "Blocking" procedures, more well known and enforced. The DOT/ ANSI/ ISEA/ NFPA rules need to all come together and there needs to be a push at the state levels to make them law. There are states that require you to automatically move over 1 lane and slow down by 10 or 20 mph every time you see lights on the side of the road. NJ is the busiest most congested road system in the country, and there needs to be legislation to protect us.

For more information, Go to firehouse.com and check out the University of Extrication.

[papacheese]

Dean, I don;t think you're wrong at all....everything you comment on makes perfect sense. IF they get hit so many damn times, then why would it be a huge stretch of the imagination to picture us getting whacked? I don't think that's the issue at all...I think it's more political in nature: let's keep the motoring public happy by letting them squeeze by the moving targets. We had a van overturned in the fast lanes of 38 and the police refused to shut down the slow lane...which meant that everyone had to repeatedly cross the line of traffic to get tools, stretchers, and additional personnel to the accident. I had to station one firefighter next to the lane to make sure none of the personnel involved in the extrication accidentally took two steps back and got themselves whacked by a car.

No matter how hard I try to conjure up some reasonable explanation for this, I can't. Obviously the police have a mandate: keep the roads open regardless (or in spite of) any activity taking place on them. In many ways, I don't personally blame them...they're simply following their orders.

If this is going to get changed, it has to happen on both a local and a state level...someone has got to put their foot down and make first responder safety - that includes everyone, not just the firefighters, the primary objective.

[voyager9]

I 100% agree with everything that has been said. While I'm not going to shut down a road needlessly, I won't hesitate to do so if it means my crew and I are safer.

I also don't blame the PD personally, but the politico's above them, and the public at large. The commuters who call and complain whenever there is a backup. Most drivers are so self-involved that they wouldn't move over for us, even if they saw us in the first place! Not only that, but when they are forced to move over, the first thing they do is is complain. The Politicos are anxious to respond to the whim of "The Taxpayer" and the PD ends up stuck in the middle.

[shader101]

we been lucky lately our pd for the most part is pretty good about shutting down lanes, the few times we had state pd they were great even called state hwy dept for cones and bumper truck setups, now if we could just get them not to block the front of a building at a call ; since it was a federal judge that ruled wonder what new fed regs will come about from it? maybe something to our (FD) benifit but i wouldn't hold my breath waiting

[Bossa]

We have a good relationship with our PD and this is never an issue in town. However, we also run NJTP and Rt 295, and one of the first things we teach those that want to sit in the front seat is that the State Police are in command on those two roadways, regardless of the type of incident.

We have had mostly good dealings with them, but you do get the occasional trooper with the "this is my highway" complex. I can recall at least two times where we have made sure driver and passengers were ok, then packed up and left.

Like with any police officer, sometimes its just how you talk to them that can make a difference!

[papacheese]

I in no way, shape, or form harbor the slightest amount of disrespect for police officers...their job is as dangerous as ours, if not more so. My attitude towards blockading to protect firefighters is pretty linear: with it, they are safer, without it they are in more danger. Seems pretty clear-cut to me. If I should err, it will ALWAYS be on the side of our troops, and NOT the poor, harried motorist who needs to get Billy or Suzy to karate class NOW. I understand it's a pain-in-the-tush (I once spent three very long hours sitting on the Schuykill Expressway) but given a choice between waiting or possibly smacking into a distracted firefighter, I can certainly wait.

All this begs the ultimate question: Which is more important: keeping a roadway open or keeping emergency response personnel safe? Seems to me that too often, the two goals are diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive.

OK..the horse is dead (for me at least)