Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Boy, 2, and two Lodi Police Partners injured in Hutchins Street crash

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 12:00 am

A 2-year-old boy and two volunteer Lodi Police Partners were hospitalized Monday after a crash that closed southbound Hutchins Street for a time.

The 10:04 a.m. collision remains under investigation, but it appeared that the Partners began to turn onto Wimbledon Drive, in front of a southbound Mazda 6 sedan, according to police. Both vehicles spun and came to rest at the intersection.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

You must login to view the full content on this page.

Thank you for reading 20 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 20 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription at this time and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 209-369-2761. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?

Subscribe

Login

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

35 comments:

  • posted at 11:01 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    Again, I hope all the injured are doing well and will make a full recovery.

     
  • posted at 11:00 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    goodgoing wrote "The Partners do a lot of work."No one is disputing that, goodgoing. One can do a lot of good and still be at fault in such a car accident.

     
  • posted at 10:58 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    goodgoing wrote "How many times has someone turned in front of you and by braking or swerving you have avoided an accident."This has happened to me plenty of times, but if in fact an accident had occurred it would have been the other vehicles fault.

     
  • posted at 10:57 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    goodgoing wrote "Was the mother speeding? Was she on the cell phone or distracted by something like her unrestrained child?"goodgoing: Get your facts straight. The child was restrained in his car seat, but not restrained properly.

     
  • posted at 10:52 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    goodgoing: You seem to really be trying to make a case against the driver that actually had the right of way here, and without the accident report in hand. Also, you said, "There is a shared responsibility in that the accident might have been avoided with reasonable defensive driving." Are you kidding me? Now you want the driver with the right of way to share in the responsibility of this accident, saying they should have been a more defensive driver? Do you not see how ridiculous that sounds? That’s not how it works. And, yes, goodgoing, age does indeed factor in when it comes to some elderly drivers. You can't possibly be that naive.

     
  • posted at 9:04 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    There three areas of comments that bother me about this accident. The first are the prejudicial comments made about age. It is not politically correct to be prejudice towards many things like race, but age? – have at it. Did age have anything to do with this accident? It doesn’t matter those old gizzards shouldn’t be driving anyway.The second is the rush to a conclusion that the accident couldn’t have been avoided (pre-judge). Was the mother speeding? Was she on the cell phone or distracted by something like her unrestrained child? How many times has someone turned in front of you and by braking or swerving you have avoided an accident. Was the van stalled in the street for a length of time and she just plowed into them?Continued part 2 and 3

     
  • posted at 9:03 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    Part 2The third area is that there are certain probabilities. The Partners do a lot of work. If they didn’t do the work then the regular city staff would have to do it. It is a matter of exposure. Eventually someone is going to get into an accident. Maybe there is a slightly high probability that a ‘senior citizen’ is going to get into an accident but someone is finally going to make a mistake.Although it doesn’t look good for the Police Partners, I think that one has to wait for the police report. An accident like this is probably not with one party 100% in error. There is a shared responsibility in that the accident might have been avoided with reasonable defensive driving. If the report doesn’t find that the Partners aren’t completely at fault, there will be a big yell of coverup. The mother will probably ‘win’ with 100% financial ‘reward’ and the lawyer will end up with 80% of that after remuneration and expenses.

     
  • posted at 9:03 am on Fri, May 28, 2010.

    Posts:

    Part 3We will all pay. First the lodians (except Mr. Lodian) who will pay directly. Then eventually everyone will pay with larger insurance premiums. The money doesn’t come from nowhere but most of it eventually ends up in the legal system, first the lawyers (greed), then the judges (high salaries, nice facilities, large well paid staff) and finally the complainant or citizen or victim who get the (crumbs).I hope the News-Sentinel continues to report on this with the final settlement and the distribution of money to the lawyers and ‘victim’.

     
  • posted at 3:35 am on Wed, May 26, 2010.

    Posts:

    Though I'm not a fan of LPD most of the time, the Partners perform a lot of valuable services to the city at a much lower cost than having a sworn officer could.Yes they are old. Yes, most if not all are retired. Yes, some older drivers don't belong driving a car.I think the volunteers in Partners and LPD can evaluate who can who can't operate a motor vehicle. I don't know if it's one of the requirements or not.Many older drivers voluntarily give up their liscence. My mother did, as did other older drivers have that I know.I wouldn't quickly jump to the conclusion that because someone old was driving a car and was involved in a MVA, that their age was the primary contributor to it.

     
  • posted at 7:33 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Lodinews needs to get the story straight before writting it. The mother of the boy was taken to uc Davis ICU she was not released with no injuries.

     
  • posted at 6:13 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Prayers for a full recovery of the injured.

     
  • posted at 6:13 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Dogs:It would cost another few million to have the up-to-date machines to be able to scan for everything. Areas where I'm fairly certain Lodi is lacking in, a burn center this is a very specialixed care aspect and would need millions in and of itself to operate. A brain trama center, Lodi can probably figure out what is happening but I doubt they could do much about it. I doubt we even have much a heart surgery department.Lodi is exactly what it is, a small city hospital with limited resources. All the basic things we need done can probably be done there, but when it comes to complications involving the heart, lungs, and brain, they would be better off transfering patients where they are already set up.Maybe someone who wokrs for LMH can tell us what was done for the construction.

     
  • posted at 6:12 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    This was a bad accident especially for 10am and clear weather. I sure hope this partner will be strictly evaluated before ever being allowed to drive again. The partners in Lodi should all be strictly evaluated, as age is a proven risk factor when it comes to driving, especially in bad weather and at night. I'm so glad there wasn't a pedestrian crossing the street or a bicyclist in that bike lane. They wouldn't have walked away.

     
  • posted at 4:51 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    wujek: you make it sound like all LMH is good for putting a bandage on a cut. Don`t they have the most up to date equipment, just spent millions on a new wing. Glad I don`t belong to that outfit. I`m not a Doc. however I would think LMH has equipment to check for most anything that would be life threating. Guess I`m wrong. Granted LMH is not Davis.

     
  • posted at 3:34 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    dogs4you:I believe it depends on the kind of observation that is being done. The kind and extent of the injuried was not reveled, but with the age of the lady I suspect that blood clots are a real concern. UC Davis, with it's higher end tech stuff may be better suited to watch for that tiny clot Lodi would miss. Think of it in terms of specialty stores. You can go to Walmart to get sporting goods, or you can go to Sports Authority. Which is more likely to have what you need?I'm not sure what all the expansion included, if it was just an updating or an expansion for more capacity, but Lodi is just not the same level as Davis is.

     
  • posted at 1:55 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    stuck, the lady was transfered to UC Davis for observation, my point was, couldn`t the Doc`s a LMH do the same. If you read my post again, I`m asking a few questions that I believe could use some answers. There is a huge difference between Trauma and observation. Trauma was not mentened in the article. Since the Partners auto was making a left turn, they are responable for the accident. And BTW, LMH doesn`t rank that high as far as hospitals are concerned in San Joaquin County.

     
  • posted at 1:48 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    forgot to add that the chysler town and country mini van is a sad loss to the citizens of lodi as well

     
  • posted at 1:46 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    I heard the partner/driver was under the influence of Geritol at the time of collision

     
  • posted at 1:23 pm on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    dogs4youLodi Memorial is a great hospital!!! i had 2 of children there and they have taken excellent care of many of my family members. BUT they are not a hospital that specializes in TRAUMA. there is a difference. UC Davis has Specialists on staff that Lodi Memorial could only dream of. not to mention its a teaching hospital that has access to state of the art equipment. please remember this partner that so generously DONATES her time to help make your community a better place is a WIFE and surely a mother and grandmother. how many hours do you DONATE to your community. If this woman were your family im sure you would have kept your rude comments to yourself!!!!

     
  • posted at 9:49 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    I didn't mean to minimize the child's injury at all. I think it's a good sign that he didn't have to be flown out to UCD Med Center like the partner.

     
  • posted at 7:59 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Setting aside the accident, perhaps Layla can explane the reason for the female Partner, after being taken to the new $300,000 million billion dollar Lodi Memorial Hospital, and why then was she transfered to UC Davis for further observation. Doesn`t say much for LMH as far as observation is concerned. As far as insurance goes, no insurance, get in line at San Joaquin General. Was the lady that needed further observation driven or flown by Medi-flight. Makes one wonder who paid for the flght ( if by chopper )since it is very expensive to keep them in operation. I know, the citizens of Lodi will foot the bill since it was a city owned vehicle.

     
  • posted at 7:37 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Considering the child was 2, they hate being in their car seats and are Houdini's at getting out of them. He could have slipped his arms out of the restraints and the mother didn't realize this, or as one poster said, the car seat might not have been properly buckled in. Either way, I am sure the mother is thankful her child is alive. A laceration and a bump on the head is nothing to sneeze at though - the child could have a concussion. To been there: seat belts have been proven over and over again to save lives. It's a wise thing to wear them. Perhaps if the child had been properly restrained, he might not have the bump and the laceration on the head? We don't know, but chances are he wouldn't be hurt. Last week I saw a female officer driving while talking on her cell phone. Not good at all. And another cop almost broadsided us as we were going through an intersection we had the right of way and he was blowing through a stop sign - no emergency lights were on. I wish cops did obey the same rules.

     
  • posted at 5:45 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    I would like to point out the difference between NOT restrained and not PROPERLY restrained. NR means there was no safety seat or the child was not buckled into it. NPR means there was a seat and the child was not properly fastened into it, or the seat was not properly restrained to the vehicle.I'm not sure when the last time the LPD did a safety seat inspection but in my home town 75-80% of parents who came it to check their safety seats were found not to have them properly secured, as this article says. The most common culprits, seat not secured to the vehicle at all, safety seat wrong size for child (60# child in 40# seat), and seat secured but loosely which allows the child to spill out in an accident.Glad my youngest is just about out of those things.

     
  • posted at 4:58 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Yesterday's article said the child was restrained properly, unless I read it wrong.If the child wasn't restrained, God must have been looking out for him if he only received a bump on the head. I hope this serves as a wake-up call for Mom.I still think a physical would be a good idea for the parnter. He turned in front of an oncoming car, causing an accident. He might have issues with eyesight, reflexes, etc. that could be addressed.

     
  • posted at 4:43 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    deblaw: While we appreciate the contributions of Partners, the taxpayer will be on the hook for any lawsuit that the woman may care to file - and I can almost guarantee that she (and/or her insurance company) will file. The mistake was human, but also avoidable had the driver of the van been more careful in making the left turn. Under California vehicle code, the driver making a left hand turn has the burden to make sure conditions are safe before proceeding. It appears from the information provided int he article that the driver did not make a safe left hand turn, hence the collision. In my opinion, this is an easy win for an PI attorney. Any recovery that the woman might be entitled to will be reduced by her negligence in failing to buckle her and her child up. But she will still recover monetary damages, and we, the citizens of Lodi, will subsidize this recovery.

     
  • posted at 4:40 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Press...you are right about something really wrong at LPD.I had to have an officer sign off on a headlight repair. The desk girl told me to wait outside for an officer. Half an hour later a patrol car pulled up. I'm right in front of the police department, presumably FULL of police officers of one kind or another, and they pull a patrol cop off the streets to sign my fix-it ticket!That is just crazy...the system is broken somewhere.Deblaw: Yes, the mother and child did not have their mandatory restraint devices in place. The child did not have a choice, but the mother certainly did. We won't go into the discussion about seatbelt laws being a violation of Constitutional rights...The partner (not sure which was driving, the article didn't state that) made a severe error in judgment when he/she made the turn in front of the vehicle. Perhaps related individuals should not be in the same vehicle as the chances for distractions from "personal conversations" could occur. Maybe they were having a marital dispute at the time?

     
  • posted at 4:25 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    What in the world is wrong with you people. These older folks are voluntering their time to try to help, yes, the man made a mistake, so what!What kind of Mother does not have her 2 year old properly restrained while driving... She is the one at fault for the injuries to her and her son.

     
  • posted at 4:07 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Amen, wowerzz! LPD has too many desk sergeants that need to be on the streets and not writing reports and doing PR work. Sentinel, how about an article detailing the chain of command at both the LFD and LPD and a chart showing the power structure from top to bottom? And all the trained officers that are only supervisory and not on patrol? Didn't it used to be one supervisor for every patrolman on the streets? Got any guts?

     
  • posted at 4:01 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    PMarie, inforcements? LOL for someone chastising another for not reading a dictionary. Do you know what spell check is?

     
  • posted at 3:44 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Just curious, Marie: What's with the dictionary comment about 4AStrongLodi?I see two spelling errors in your post: "opviously" and "inforcements" plus the comma error in Paragraph 4.Please comment.

     
  • posted at 3:20 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    4ASTRONGLODI- I totally agree with ya...these old geezers were going to do something like this sooner or later....I actually personally hate one of them...the Old HAG gave me a parking ticket in my own parking lot of my business...cuase I was washing my car in a crosswalk section of the lot...i took the ticket..and told her to get the Puck off my lot and that shes not welcome at my business any longer..she heard more than this from me...but my Post will be deleted!

     
  • posted at 3:08 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    Mom will have a small misdemeanor fine, and a new car after it's all said and done! Way to go Partners! You just cost us taxpayers about $20,000+...nice.

     
  • posted at 2:18 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    I'm glad to read a better,informative article in the lodi paper.The story yesterday was wrong and did not mention much about the victims, of both vehicles. As for the other posts from strongerlodi and beenthere.....I promise not to let their ridiculous statements influence my opinion of this city. As I stated yesterday, accidents do happen, and I'm proud of the partners involvement in the safety of Lodi. As for Mom who didn't buckle-up? I bet she's counting her blessings, her child didn't suffer a worse injury. I wonder if she agree's with the brains of the other post, been there hasn't been anywhere, and stronger lodi opviously hasn't ever read a dictionary! A stronger city is made, with the help from all city inforcements of the Law. Partners participation only helps!!

     
  • posted at 1:41 am on Tue, May 25, 2010.

    Posts:

    I'm not sure it's a great idea for the City to give 70+ year olds a job where they drive a big van around all day. This was just an accident waiting to happen.

     
  • posted at 11:40 pm on Mon, May 24, 2010.

    Posts:

    Why even mention that the child wasunrestrained? These volunteers are asabove the law as the cops they workwith are. " we don't need no stinkingseat belts".

     
Readers Choice Awards 2014

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists