Man Saves Son From Drowning: Gets 2 Tickets From Police

[Bob Saget]

http://www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/national/new-jersey-dad-saves-son-gets-two-traffic-tickets

A dad jumped into action to save his son's life and ended up getting two tickets from a traffic officer because of it, according to a Monday report.

Frank Roder took his son to a park in New Jersey to feed the ducks.

He was inside his Jeep when he noticed his son running toward a steep embankment that plunged down into water.

Frank reacted quickly.

He leapt out of the vehicle, ran after his son, and grabbed him just feet from the edge.

He must have had a sinking feeling in his gut, when he turned around and watched his Jeep roll down the same embankment.

Adding insult to the injury to his vehicle, Frank was ticketed by a police officer, not once but twice.

The first ticket was for failure to use his parking brake, the other was for failure to produce his insurance card, which was in his waterlogged vehicle


Read more: http://www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/nation...es-son-gets-two-traffic-tickets#ixzz1vk3ORiDg

As angry as this makes me, I heard tonight that a local organization has donated $$ to pay for this man's legal fines. Not because the costs were so expensive that he could not afford them himself, but just the principle of it...and to pretty much give the middle finger to the officer.
So now, this brave father will not lose a penny out of his own pocket due to the tickets. :sohappy::sohappy:

 

[The Mom]

What if there had been children feeding the ducks at the bottom of the embankment? Or fishermen? They could have been injured or killed. Just as his son could have been injured or killed. Would taking a second to pull or hit the parking brake make the difference between life and death? Possibly, on both sides of the issue.

But the father's panicked actions created a dangerous situation, so he was given a ticket for failure to use his parking brake. Any one of us might react exactly the same, but that still doesn't excuse us from the legal consequences.

I'm not sure about the insurance one - I would need more information.

 

[flynnibus]

The officer's job is to enforce the laws - not interpret them. That's for the courts.

 

[Bob Saget]

Had it been only the ticket for not using the emergency brake, this whole thing probably would never make the news. And at first glance, I could understand why, & for the very same reasons...children, people fishing, etc. Makes sense. But then more details surfaced on this particular location. The vehicle fell off a straight-down, 35-ft drop over the Rahway River. This dangerous ledge was not an area where people would be swimming, feeding ducks, etc. The car hadn't even made it to the public parking area when the son quickly jumped out of his seat and began running to the cliff. But despite all that, I can still understand why an officer would have to issue a ticket for that if he felt it warranted such.

However, the second ticket (which was actually the first one written & issued to the father) was for failure to produce a valid insurance card. That valid insurance card was inside his vehicle. The father explained this again & again to the young officer. The father even offered to rummage through the vehicle (however unsafe that may be) once it was recovered and pull out insurance card. Officer still said no. One article over the incident even stated the car HAD been pulled out of the river by the time the officer arrived on scene who issued the tickets...and would not let the man go in and grab insurance card due to safety.

The whole blow-up over this story has been the 2 tickets...especially the one for "no" insurance card. One ticket for not using emergency brake...okay, I get it. But this seemed to be kicking a man when he's down.

 

[fractal]

I agree with you Bob. Seem like that cop was just being a D**k.

 

[njDizFan]

The officer's job is to enforce the laws - not interpret them. That's for the courts.

But police are not robots, the job requires common sense. I'm sure he could have cited the man with other additional charges...child endangement, seatbelts, wreckless driving..who knows? I'm sure most of us are guilty of a few non-egrious driving regulations daily which could be ticketed offenses.

There are sometimes mitigating circumstances that require flexibility and compassion.

 

[Bob Saget]

The officer's job is to enforce the laws - not interpret them.

Don't get me wrong. I support our men & women of law enforcement. ^But that mindset can cause lots of problems & even cost lives. If some psychotic leader or lawmaker gets into power and believes all (insert any ethnic or religious group here) should be exterminated, then we are to blindly accept & enforce that? Afterall, it would be the law. Was that an extreme example? Perhaps. But considering it has happened before...

I agree with njDizFan. Police are not robots.

 

[flynnibus]

Don't get me wrong. I support our men & women of law enforcement. ^But that mindset can cause lots of problems & even cost lives. If some psychotic leader or lawmaker gets into power and believes all (insert any ethnic group here) should be exterminated, then we are to blindly accept & enforce that? Afterall, it would be the law. Was that an extreme example? Perhaps. But considering it has happened before...

They absolutely are to enforce the law. The police are not the checks and balances in our legal system. The courts and the electorate are.

It's not up to the police to decide what laws are valid or not.

 

[luv]

I wouldn't have ticketed him and am very glad he got to his son.

Too bad he had to lose his car in the process.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Something about this bugs me. Dude pulls up on such a steep grade that his parking gear won't hold the vehicle, his son gets out and toward the cliff with such speed that the father has to hurriedly go after him. I mean, it takes my eight year old almost forever to get out of his seatbelt get the door open and out of the car when we go places I practically have enough time to gather stuff and get to his door before he even thinks of opening his. I think there is probably more to this story.

 

[Laura]

It's weird that the dad was still sitting in the car while his son was outside running around, and I'm sure the article was purposely slanted with the intent to rile up the public, but regardless of how much of the story is unknown, being ticketed for failure to produce an insurance card from a vehicle that is underwater makes absolutely no flipping sense.

 

[wilkeliza]

Something doesn't sit right with me about this story. If he was indeed parked on a steep embankment why was his parking break not engaged? Also why was he in his truck while his son was running around. Also I didn't read anywhere how old the son was but why was he allowed to play while dad was in the Jeep anywhere near a dangerous embankment?

It just screams bad parenting and he should be ticketed. I don't see this as him "saving his son from drowning" he kept his son from doing something that he should have been watching him to prevent in the first place. Saving someone from drowning is pulling them out of water and doing CPR not grabbing them right before they go over an embankment. This is just trying to make a hero out of someone who was being a bad parent in the first place.

 

[The Mom]

Something about this bugs me. Dude pulls up on such a steep grade that his parking gear won't hold the vehicle, his son gets out and toward the cliff with such speed that the father has to hurriedly go after him. I mean, it takes my eight year old almost forever to get out of his seatbelt get the door open and out of the car when we go places I practically have enough time to gather stuff and get to his door before he even thinks of opening his. I think there is probably more to this story.

Another article stated that:

1. The parents had recently taught their 5 year old son how to undo his seat belt and open the door to save time and effort. They have a 7 month old (not with the father) so had to undo both from car seats and open two different doors, taking a lot of time.

2. The son did the above while the father was still parking the car. The father thought he had put the car in park before jumping out to run after his son - but instead, broke the wiper control. His own car had the gears on the column- the jeep had them on a floor shift.

This is the father's story about the circumstances surrounding the incident; I don't know if there were any witnesses.

So the parking brake was never engaged - per the father's story -, and the car was in drive. It was a panic situation which could have ended even worse than it did.

I also felt the insurance card ticket was not warranted - but I don't know the whole story.

 

[ddbowdoin]

They absolutely are to enforce the law. The police are not the checks and balances in our legal system. The courts and the electorate are.

It's not up to the police to decide what laws are valid or not.

the shield gives people big heads...

often times they aren't sure what the law is, and will bluff behind the power of the badge to make you think they KNOW the law.

trust me, as a professional photographer I've heard a MILLION cops tell me it's illegal to photograph X, or them, or something they are doing. After a few altercations, broken cameras (because they're d***s , even though its insured professional gear), and a few rides I've never been charged with ANYTHING because at the end of the day someone who actually knows the law will inform the street officer that he's an idiot and wrong.

not to blanket all cops... but from my overall experience (and perhaps Boston with their massive union and power) get away with A LOT.

I'll take as much slack for this stance too... seems the only people who genuinely support cops are those who 1.) are cops. 2.) have a husband /wife in law enforcement, 3.) cop families

 

[wilkeliza]

Another article stated that:

1. The parents had recently taught their 5 year old son how to undo his seat belt and open the door to save time and effort. They have a 7 month old (not with the father) so had to undo both from car seats and open two different doors, taking a lot of time.

2. The son did the above while the father was still parking the car. The father thought he had put the car in park before jumping out to run after his son - but instead, broke the wiper control. His own car had the gears on the column- the jeep had them on a floor shift.

This is the father's story about the circumstances surrounding the incident; I don't know if there were any witnesses.

So the parking brake was never engaged - per the father's story -, and the car was in drive. It was a panic situation which could have ended even worse than it did.

I also felt the insurance card ticket was not warranted - but I don't know the whole story.

I still stand by this being bad parenting no matter how old the child is. No child until the can be trusted not to open the door to a moving car should be allowed to let themselves out.

The insurance card ticket can be thrown out with proper verification at the court house. The parking break tick will probably not be thrown out because it was not engaged and he could even get in trouble for endangering the life of a child. If they are so willing to put him in danger to save 1 minute when unloading both kids what else have they don't that may put them in danger. Imagine had he done this in a busy parking garage or in an instants where no one notices and he gets run over by the parent's car? They were very very lucky they didn't loose him this time next time they may not be so lucky.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

What laws are being broken? What does the evidence say? Make your decision.

Pretty simple stuff.

As for the insurance card, if the driver legitimately has insurance and his card was legitimately lost in a drowned vehicle and can produce proof in front of a judge, I highly doubt it would not get thrown out of court. He got ticketed because he could not produce what is required by law for him to have. The law is the law.

I would have done the exact same thing if I was in my fellow officer's shoes.

Remember, if you only get one side of the story, your not getting the full story, there is always more than one might think to sort out, and any officer of the law can spot a liar a mile away.


Jimmy Thick-Unfortunately.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

the shield gives people big heads...

often times they aren't sure what the law is, and will bluff behind the power of the badge to make you think they KNOW the law.

trust me, as a professional photographer I've heard a MILLION cops tell me it's illegal to photograph X, or them, or something they are doing. After a few altercations, broken cameras (because they're d***s , even though its insured professional gear), and a few rides I've never been charged with ANYTHING because at the end of the day someone who actually knows the law will inform the street officer that he's an idiot and wrong.

not to blanket all cops... but from my overall experience (and perhaps Boston with their massive union and power) get away with A LOT.

I'll take as much slack for this stance too... seems the only people who genuinely support cops are those who 1.) are cops. 2.) have a husband /wife in law enforcement, 3.) cop families

Not everyone is cut out for the life of a police officer, people don't realize what it is we do and think its whats portrayed on film or television. Shows like COPS are real, but I never see action like that in a week that they show in 30 minutes. A great day for me is to patrol, help people, and go home to my family. Anytime I can go a day without confrontation is a FABULOUS day.

Are there bad police officers? We have Internal affairs for a reason.


But the other token is, again, most civillians have no clue just what we do and think we are paid thugs, I assure you, when all is said and done if someone is pointing a gun at you and your family, I will be the one jumping in between to take the bullet and I would die to protect you and yours without thinking.

Most officers have that mentality, its not because its our job, its because its who we are and we care more than anyone might think.


It's a thankless, and becoming more and more a misunderstood job, but if it helps one person, its worth it.



Jimmy Thick-And thats that.

 

[Lucky]

What laws are being broken? What does the evidence say? Make your decision.

Pretty simple stuff.

As for the insurance card, if the driver legitimately has insurance and his card was legitimately lost in a drowned vehicle and can produce proof in front of a judge, I highly doubt it would not get thrown out of court. He got ticketed because he could not produce what is required by law for him to have. The law is the law.

I would have done the exact same thing if I was in my fellow officer's shoes.

Remember, if you only get one side of the story, your not getting the full story, there is always more than one might think to sort out, and any officer of the law can spot a liar a mile away.
Jimmy Thick-Unfortunately.

This actually makes sense, except for the last bit.