Disagree all you want... it won’t change the basic fact that her hit & run is why the officer was there and out of his vehicle. SHE was the proximate cause of his presence, thus of his death. Whether she’s LEGALLY LIABLE or not, I can’t say, but morally, it’s without question in my mind. Of ccourse the DRUNK AND ILLEGAL mexican has his own liability to deal with, but here we have a two-fer. Illegals who hit and run and who drive drunk and kill folks. Oughtta be a double hanging, far as I can see!
>>SHE was the proximate cause of his presence, thus of his death<<
Have you ever had something really bad happen in your life and think, if only I had not decided to go to work that day, I wouldn’t have been broadsided by the guy that ran the red light?
In that case, as much as you want to blame your job, or the route you took, or the timing and if only you had done something differently. But it was none of those things. It was the guy running the red light.
Likewise with this cop. If he was killed in a chase of this woman, she would be the cause. But he wasn’t. He was investigating an accident scene and killed by a drunk driver. Now, one may try to make the case that it was partially his fault for accidentally walking into traffic, or the barriers were not set up correctly, but what we KNOW is that the drunk driver hit him.
And the key here is that he was simply doing his job. Again, blaming her for his death would be equivalent to blaming her for his death because he was struck by a car while giving her a ticket for having a burned out license plate light. Sure, her action was the “cause” of him being there, but she is still not responsible for that particular mishap.
She is responsible for the ticket, of course, just as the woman in this story is responsible for the condition of the two motorcyclists and their bikes.
>>Of ccourse the DRUNK AND ILLEGAL mexican has his own liability to deal with, but here we have a two-fer.<<
This may be our disconnect right here. In my job it is imperative to avoid “scope creep”. I am more effective at it because I am a black and white thinker. That brings its own problems, but for things like this it is an advantage.
This issue is very black and white: the woman hit a couple of guys on motorcycles. That brings with it certain consequences. If one of the investigating officers, on his way to the scene, gets killed in an accident, the woman that hit the motorcyclists is not legally, ethically or morally culpable for his death. It is a separate incident.
Now, if the officer (or anyone else) was killed in an accident while chasing her, and any traffic laws are being violated by her AT THE TIME, then she would be, at the very least, morally responsible. Her action was at least partially a direct cause of the accident.
The police officer was simply doing his job, as a road worker might have been - and he was struck by a drunk driver. The mexican woman is no more relevant to that than the highway construction company would be if one of its highway workers was struck by a drunk driver - unless it could be proven that they had set up an unsafe work environment for the worker.
Do you see where I am going here? The woman’s flight is a story. Her hitting the bikes is a story. The officers death is a story. They are connected similar to how events are connected in the movie “Crash”, but she bears no moral or legal responsibility for the officer’s death.