Ready, Set, Decide

By Randall C. Resch               

Look closely at the opening photograph to see what appears to be a motorcyclist standing in live traffic lanes. What the … ? Towers are quick to judge another tower’s actions before knowing the facts. To that point let’s consider: Do emergency incidents allow sufficient time to react when scenarios go beyond normal?

A forum’s video captured highway traffic stopped and stacking on a busy California freeway. Serving in official capacity, a Freeway Service Patrol tower guardedly drove his FSP wrecker onto the right shoulder on approach. Noting vehicles already stopped, the operator likely directed focus towards stopped vehicles (thinking a crash occurred), but not seeing an already dismounted motorcyclist grab a carpet chunk from traffic lanes.

Considering the cyclist a pedestrian in the roadway, the operator believed he was at great peril of being struck. That’s a lot to consume without details! Seconds later, the motorcyclist, carpet in hand and on his own accord, appeared to lunge towards the emergency shoulder. With traffic approaching from behind, the operator quickly drove towards center lanes. Was it the operator’s intent to shield the pedestrian from fatal strike?

Fast Moving Action

In true manner, distracted drivers don’t react to emergency lighting, SDMO laws, or stacking traffic. A construction truck, pulling a trailer with Bobcat atop, never slowed its speed, plowing the wrecker from behind. Luckily, the pedestrian wasn’t hit.

In my opinion, the FSP operator likely spared the pedestrian’s life. In consideration to the operator’s actions versus the “Letter of Law” would the operator’s actions likely be considered “at fault?”   

Tell me quickly, was it a crash? Was the motorcyclist standing in highway lanes? If you were immediately inserted into this chaos without details, would you react differently? Fair or unfair, sometimes “arrival assessment” doesn’t afford towers sufficient time to react. If you’re one of the naysayer’s, how can you judge if you weren’t there?

Shared Responsibility?

Having carefully watched the video as though I was the on-scene investigator, I’d consider all possibilities to conclude as to which party is the most likely at fault? Let’s approach this narrative from a center of the road perspective.

Noting vehicles were stopped in live lanes, was the operator’s focus on stopped vehicles thinking a crash occurred? Is it possible the operator didn’t see the dismounted motorcyclist retrieving debris from lanes?   

From my review, the video depicted the motorcyclist moving quickly towards the emergency shoulder with carpet in hand. Is it possible the FSP operator perceived the pedestrian was about to be struck?

Do you know whether or not the FSP operator had contacted CHP dispatch for instructions? Because FSP was on-scene, was there a duty of care to protect already stopped traffic, even though he hadn’t made contact yet? Because of total on-scene complications, don't be so quick to poke fault.  Damned if you do, damned if you don’t, right?

Tough Decisions

FSP patroller’s attend special, three-day training required by CVC, Section 2436.5. Training is specific to vehicles involved in collisions, stopped in lanes, abandoned, even debris in the roadway. Many similar scenarios oftentimes require traffic breaks to slow traffic. But when ‘blink and it’s there scenarios’ happen quickly, there’s not always time to determine the possibilities.

As for the officer tasked to this investigation, assigning fault comes down too many contributing factors. Consider the following pertaining this scenario:

-- Were the wrecker’s overhead emergency lights “on” per, CVC 21809, Slow Down Move-Over law?

-- Did the FSP operator violate unsafe movement (left or right) per, CVC 22106

-- Did the construction truck violate, CVC 21809, Slow Down Move-Over?

-- Did the construction truck’s brake’s fail?

-- Did the construction truck have a full/partially full, auxiliary, bed mounted fuel tank?

-- Was the construction truck’s load too heavy for panic braking?

-- Was the construction truck’s driver intoxicated? A medical issue?

-- Was the construction truck driving at speed too fast for conditions, CVC 22348, (Speed on highway)?

-- Did the motorcyclist (pedestrian) violate, CVC 22400, blocking/impeding traffic?

-- Did the FSP operator violate SOP procedures regarding roadway debris or vehicles stopped in lanes?

-- Open Your Mind

When investigating collisions, every crash includes associated factors. In all fairness to determining, who’s at fault, remember that FSP towers are allowed a level of decision making to fit the scenario. How would you have reacted under similar conditions?

If you’ve never arrived at this kind of right now situation, know that arrival assessment must be quick and decisive. I believe the FSP operator’s perception may have spared the motorcyclist's life.

Perhaps it was the motorcyclist who was initially at-fault for stopping in live lanes, even if to be a Good Samaritan himself. None-the-less, assigning fault is specific to what laws violated “Letter of the law” versus “Spirit of the law” considerations. Don’t judge when you don’t know!           

Operations Editor Randall C. Resch is a retired, veteran, California police officer, former tow business owner and industry advocate. As consultant and trainer, he authored and teaches tow truck operator safety courses approved by the California Highway Patrol. For 55-years, he has been involved in the towing and recovery industry. In 28-years, he has contributed more than 760-safety focused articles for American Towman Magazine, TowIndustryWeek.com and is a frequent seminar presenter and beauty pageant judge at tow shows. In 2014, he was inducted to the International Towing and Recovery Industry Hall of Fame, was the 3rd recipient of the industry's "Dave Jones Leadership Award," and is a member of American Towman’s Safety Committee. Email Randy at rreschran@gmail.com.