Death on the Parkway

breda said :

Well, spello’s (sic) are the least of it. As I said before, comparisons with other media outlets are irrelevant – although few, if any, are as consistently illiterate as ACT Policing’s press releases.

I reiterate that if they can’t even put out a short press release about a fairly straightforward car accident without significant errors and ambiguities, what must their briefs about more complex matters look like? If the senior hierarchy regards this consistently unprofessional output as acceptable, what is the standard required of those who don’t get paid to write for a living?

One has to wonder what merit standards are applied in the ACT Policing unit that issues these releases. One further has to wonder whether those who overlook or don’t notice these things are also overlooking or not noticing very poor written skills in other areas, such as briefs for prosecutors.

Hmm.. You do realise you don’t know what your talking about?

Well, spello’s (sic) are the least of it. As I said before, comparisons with other media outlets are irrelevant – although few, if any, are as consistently illiterate as ACT Policing’s press releases.

I reiterate that if they can’t even put out a short press release about a fairly straightforward car accident without significant errors and ambiguities, what must their briefs about more complex matters look like? If the senior hierarchy regards this consistently unprofessional output as acceptable, what is the standard required of those who don’t get paid to write for a living?

One has to wonder what merit standards are applied in the ACT Policing unit that issues these releases. One further has to wonder whether those who overlook or don’t notice these things are also overlooking or not noticing very poor written skills in other areas, such as briefs for prosecutors.

In the example I commented on above, there were two substantive points which were incorrect – contradictory information on when the man died, and stating (through atrocious grammar) that it was the car, not the driver, that lost control. If that kind of imprecision litters the briefs provided by ACT Policing to prosecutors, no wonder they have trouble getting convictions.

Despite the pompous and arrogant tone of your comments, I agree with you about the obvious mistakes, and to be quite honest, I often find the basic errors in their media releases absolutely cringe worthy. However, my point was that the media team have nothing to do with Court briefs and to assume that ‘that kind of imprecision’ litters briefs, is incorrect. Briefs, unlike these media releases, go through several sets of hands (and eyes) before even landing on the desk of the DPP, so such errors are generally weeded out. I suspect some of these media releases are rushed through to meet certain deadlines and as such, are not proofread to any great extent.

In most organisations, the people who produce material for the public to read are experts at written communication – much more so than those who perform other tasks. If the hierarchy at ACT Policing think that their press people are of an acceptable standard, it seems likely that they wouldn’t have much aptitude or skill for critically evaluating written material generated elsewhere in the organisation.

The police who are vetting briefs have nothing to do with vetting media releases. You’re making some big assumptions based on very little knowledge of the organisation.

breda said :

In the example I commented on above, there were two substantive points which were incorrect – contradictory information on when the man died, and stating (through atrocious grammar) that it was the car, not the driver, that lost control. If that kind of imprecision litters the briefs provided by ACT Policing to prosecutors, no wonder they have trouble getting convictions.

Can you please quote the amount of briefs that go without conviction as opposed to gaining conviction …… if you are quoting an apparent “trouble to get convictions” then you must have the current apparent failure rate?

breda said :

What has the poor quality of media releases got to do with briefs? Serious comment, or are you trying to get a bite?
——————————————————————————————–
It’s a very serious comment, and the point is probably more significant than the embarrassingly illiterate press releases routinely issued by ACT Policing.

In the example I commented on above, there were two substantive points which were incorrect – contradictory information on when the man died, and stating (through atrocious grammar) that it was the car, not the driver, that lost control. If that kind of imprecision litters the briefs provided by ACT Policing to prosecutors, no wonder they have trouble getting convictions.

In most organisations, the people who produce material for the public to read are experts at written communication – much more so than those who perform other tasks. If the hierarchy at ACT Policing think that their press people are of an acceptable standard, it seems likely that they wouldn’t have much aptitude or skill for critically evaluating written material generated elsewhere in the organisation.

Are u serious …….. seriously, supposed spello’s and incorrect english which the commercial and “professionals” cant get right even though they have multi tiered editors !!!!! Will you jump onto the ninemsn site and praise them with the same amount of praise, or ABC, SBS, TEN or who ever?

If a medical reason is the cause of a collision, how is that reasonably expected to be added to a road toll ?? How is the Government, police etc expected to prevent a person having a heart attack or other medical ailment ???

So many complainers and sooks over trivial crap ……. some people really need to grow up and look at the bigger picture than their apparent ego’s

What has the poor quality of media releases got to do with briefs? Serious comment, or are you trying to get a bite?
——————————————————————————————–
It’s a very serious comment, and the point is probably more significant than the embarrassingly illiterate press releases routinely issued by ACT Policing.

In the example I commented on above, there were two substantive points which were incorrect – contradictory information on when the man died, and stating (through atrocious grammar) that it was the car, not the driver, that lost control. If that kind of imprecision litters the briefs provided by ACT Policing to prosecutors, no wonder they have trouble getting convictions.

In most organisations, the people who produce material for the public to read are experts at written communication – much more so than those who perform other tasks. If the hierarchy at ACT Policing think that their press people are of an acceptable standard, it seems likely that they wouldn’t have much aptitude or skill for critically evaluating written material generated elsewhere in the organisation.

breda said :

buzz819, when the best you can come up with is personal attacks and irrelevant comparisons with other media outlets (none of which is remotely as bad as ACT Policing, except perhaps ABC Online), real argument is obviously thin on the ground.

ABC Online gets a special mention because the ABC pretends to be an arbiter of high quality journalism. This week’s winner was a headline that said that the “State Parliament” of the Northern Territory did something. I mean, really, even Crikey usually does better than that.

As Fairfax are apparently about to get rid of their sub-editors, ACT Policing would be well advised to snap a few of them up (presuming that someone’s partner or relative is not next in line) to fix up their sub-literate media releases, and perhaps cast an eye over their briefs to prosecutors as well.

What has the poor quality of media releases got to do with briefs? Serious comment, or are you trying to get a bite?

buzz819, when the best you can come up with is personal attacks and irrelevant comparisons with other media outlets (none of which is remotely as bad as ACT Policing, except perhaps ABC Online), real argument is obviously thin on the ground.

ABC Online gets a special mention because the ABC pretends to be an arbiter of high quality journalism. This week’s winner was a headline that said that the “State Parliament” of the Northern Territory did something. I mean, really, even Crikey usually does better than that.

As Fairfax are apparently about to get rid of their sub-editors, ACT Policing would be well advised to snap a few of them up (presuming that someone’s partner or relative is not next in line) to fix up their sub-literate media releases, and perhaps cast an eye over their briefs to prosecutors as well.

Apart from being unprofessional, it makes one wonder at the quality of the written briefs being provided to prosecutors by the cops. When they can’t even explain clearly the sequence of events in a simple car accident, what ambiguities and inaccuracies must pervade their descriptions of more complex events? I am assuming that the PR unit is the creme de la creme of written communication ability available in ACT Policing.

So many assumptions in one post. Where does it say a police officer wrote that press release?

““Deceased” is not a verb – a person cannot be deceased in an accident”

Helps is you have a command of the English language before you expose your lack thereof in a public sense. Deceased is not being used as a verb. The sentence is quite correct, it could be substituted for ‘dead man’, and no one is intimating, by the language used, that he was ‘deaded’.

If that’s the best you’ve got perhaps you could man up and be the first respoonder at a fatal accident, or one where the people involved are gravely injured or fatally injured. All the flowery language in the world means not a jot, but I’m sure your literary gigantism would be useful somewhere, perhaps to get the coffees

dvaey said :

Interesting how they can pick what road deaths are part of the road-toll and which arent. IMHO, if youre in a vehicle on the tuggeranong parkway and you get hit by another vehicle, if someone dies, thats a road death, its hardly rocket science.

It is the cause of the accident that changes it from being related to the road toll. For instance, man has a heart attack dies, runs into another car, they pull him out and do there CPR, but can not revive him, it was the heart attack that killed him not the accident.

If it had of been that guy, having a heart attack dying, running into another car and an occupant of that car died as a result, then the heart probably would not be counted, but the other person would be.

So it’s them saying they are unsure how he died, whether it was a direct result of the trauma caused by the accident, or whether he died then caused the accident.

dvaey said :

cranky said :

The AFP have been uninterested in adding this death to the ACT road toll. Much appreciated that no speeding related comments have been reported.

Interesting how they can pick what road deaths are part of the road-toll and which arent. IMHO, if youre in a vehicle on the tuggeranong parkway and you get hit by another vehicle, if someone dies, thats a road death, its hardly rocket science.

Yeah, but it’s not a road death if he died as a result of a heart attack (or other medical condition), and that’s what caused him to crash. As the report said, whether or not it will be recorded as a road death will be dependent upon the outcome of a post-mortem.

cranky said :

The AFP have been uninterested in adding this death to the ACT road toll. Much appreciated that no speeding related comments have been reported.

Interesting how they can pick what road deaths are part of the road-toll and which arent. IMHO, if youre in a vehicle on the tuggeranong parkway and you get hit by another vehicle, if someone dies, thats a road death, its hardly rocket science.

Gerry-Built said :

I noticed the sign wasn’t being used to warn of the hazard ahead; isn’t that what it was installed for?

I thought it was installed to warn drivers of double demerit points over easter, I think thats the only useful message Ive seen it conveying. Besides, it was 7pm on a Thursday night. I wouldnt expect someone to update that sign unless an accident happened between 9:05 and 4:55pm (and didnt fall during the 1hr lunch break of the operator).

breda said :

ACT Policing is investigating a collision on the Tuggeranong Parkway in Weston tonight (Thursday, May 5) around 7pm in which an elderly male driver was deceased.

Investigators are examining the circumstances surrounding the collision, which occurred after a northbound Kia Cerato sedan driven by the deceased man, an 86-year-old from Page, has lost control and collided with the concrete divider in the centre of the road before being struck from behind by another vehicle, a Mazda sedan.

Attempts were made to resuscitate the elderly man but he later died at the scene.
—————————————————————————-
The work experience kid strikes again at ACT Policing’s PR unit.

“Deceased” is not a verb – a person cannot be deceased in an accident.

A car cannot “lose control” (let’s draw a veil over the inevitable redundant ‘has’) – only its driver can.

Further, the person was not killed in the collision, as the first paragraph indicates. As the press release goes on to state, the poor chap died afterwards.

Apart from being unprofessional, it makes one wonder at the quality of the written briefs being provided to prosecutors by the cops. When they can’t even explain clearly the sequence of events in a simple car accident, what ambiguities and inaccuracies must pervade their descriptions of more complex events? I am assuming that the PR unit is the creme de la creme of written communication ability available in ACT Policing.

Perhaps we should be a bit less critical of the success rates of prosecutors. The lack of connection between silk purses and sows’ ears comes to mind.

Attempt’s were made to resuscitate the man, so they just started doing CPR for no reason? He was pronounced dead after, just because the doctor’s couldn’t be on the scene at the time to say he was dead.

These media reports listed by the Police don’t have to be listed, how about we just ask the Police not to list them so we don’t have the endless whinging from wankers such as you?

On any given day the media has plenty of spelling mistakes, news.com.au, is always rife with them, The Australian, apparently a big newspaper can’t go a day without missing words in articles or spelling words wrong.

I’m pretty certain, with you being as much a knob as you are, when you get assaulted, the first people you will call is the Police, you may not like them, or approve of them, but I know what they do in there job does a lot more to help people then what ever meaningless life you lead will ever achieve.

breda said :

The work experience kid strikes again at ACT Policing’s PR unit.

“Deceased” is not a verb – a person cannot be deceased in an accident.

A car cannot “lose control” (let’s draw a veil over the inevitable redundant ‘has’) – only its driver can.

Further, the person was not killed in the collision, as the first paragraph indicates. As the press release goes on to state, the poor chap died afterwards.

Apart from being unprofessional, it makes one wonder at the quality of the written briefs being provided to prosecutors by the cops. When they can’t even explain clearly the sequence of events in a simple car accident, what ambiguities and inaccuracies must pervade their descriptions of more complex events? I am assuming that the PR unit is the creme de la creme of written communication ability available in ACT Policing.

Perhaps we should be a bit less critical of the success rates of prosecutors. The lack of connection between silk purses and sows’ ears comes to mind.

+1

You can be full of good intentions, but if you can’t communicate clearly and accurately, you’re basically wasting your time.

Maybe, like me, he was rubber necking what ACTEW were doing on the cliff by the parkway on Weston side with all those mega spot lights.

Deckard said :

Except for where the new electronic sign is that blinds people driving up the hill out of Kambah. Not sure if that’s where this was but is pretty dangerous.

The accident was halfway between Hindmarsh and Cotter Rd – Next to Weston, probably 250-500m south of the Heyson St underpass (roughly equal with the HUGE gum tree on Weston side). At just before 8pm, when I passed going south, there was a Woolworths truck that was probably likely to be stranded there for hours – all other traffic was being slowly turned around and led down the on ramp to Hindmarsh… I noticed the sign wasn’t being used to warn of the hazard ahead; isn’t that what it was installed for? It *IS* rather bright, isn’t it?

johnboy said :

Swerved attempting to miss it?

Well, that’s kinda what I thought.

cranky said :

Less than impressed with the apparent driving abilities of the driver of the car which hit the Kia. Nowhere on the Parkway is vision restricted to 100-150 metres, at which distance you should be able to identify a hazard and avoid.

I came over the same rise heading south at 100km/h to find a car ahead of me had stopped in the middle of the lane. While I didn’t hit it, I also didn’t stop until alongside. A better car (ABS brakes etc) would stop in time, better reflexes would be lucky to make a difference.

ACT Policing is investigating a collision on the Tuggeranong Parkway in Weston tonight (Thursday, May 5) around 7pm in which an elderly male driver was deceased.

Investigators are examining the circumstances surrounding the collision, which occurred after a northbound Kia Cerato sedan driven by the deceased man, an 86-year-old from Page, has lost control and collided with the concrete divider in the centre of the road before being struck from behind by another vehicle, a Mazda sedan.

Attempts were made to resuscitate the elderly man but he later died at the scene.
—————————————————————————-
The work experience kid strikes again at ACT Policing’s PR unit.

“Deceased” is not a verb – a person cannot be deceased in an accident.

A car cannot “lose control” (let’s draw a veil over the inevitable redundant ‘has’) – only its driver can.

Further, the person was not killed in the collision, as the first paragraph indicates. As the press release goes on to state, the poor chap died afterwards.

Apart from being unprofessional, it makes one wonder at the quality of the written briefs being provided to prosecutors by the cops. When they can’t even explain clearly the sequence of events in a simple car accident, what ambiguities and inaccuracies must pervade their descriptions of more complex events? I am assuming that the PR unit is the creme de la creme of written communication ability available in ACT Policing.

Perhaps we should be a bit less critical of the success rates of prosecutors. The lack of connection between silk purses and sows’ ears comes to mind.

cranky said :

Less than impressed with the apparent driving abilities of the driver of the car which hit the Kia. Nowhere on the Parkway is vision restricted to 100-150 metres, at which distance you should be able to identify a hazard and avoid.

Awfully judgmental? Considering both occupants of the Mazda survived without serious injury.

Interested to see how a lot of others would have coped having a car dumped in front of them in the dark when travelling at 100km/h.

Having been in Woden when the initial accident occurred (~7pm) I have to commend the ambulance response and the skill of the ambulance drivers to work themselves through the difficult traffic situations extremely quickly.

cranky said :

Less than impressed with the apparent driving abilities of the driver of the car which hit the Kia. Nowhere on the Parkway is vision restricted to 100-150 metres,.

Except for where the new electronic sign is that blinds people driving up the hill out of Kambah. Not sure if that’s where this was but is pretty dangerous.

A couple of thoughts.

The AFP have been uninterested in adding this death to the ACT road toll. Much appreciated that no speeding related comments have been reported.

Less than impressed with the apparent driving abilities of the driver of the car which hit the Kia. Nowhere on the Parkway is vision restricted to 100-150 metres, at which distance you should be able to identify a hazard and avoid.

My condolences to the family.

Swerved attempting to miss it?

Kezza said :

Tortfeaser you have to be kidding. The Kia was stopped in the right hand lane just over the crest of the road. The driver of the Mazda didn’t have time to even break and swerved to miss the vehicle which probably saved her life and that of her passenger.

My thoughts go out to the family of the deceased.

Swerved to miss it? The initial report seems to suggest that the Mazda didn’t so much miss it, as hit it.

Mysteryman said :

Thank goodness you’re here! Who would protect us from other people’s opinions, and decide what’s appropriate or not, if you weren’t!?

Ironic post is ironic.

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Kezza said :

Tortfeaser you have to be kidding. The Kia was stopped in the right hand lane just over the crest of the road. The driver of the Mazda didn’t have time to even break and swerved to miss the vehicle which probably saved her life and that of her passenger.

My thoughts go out to the family of the deceased.

I am pretty sure that tortfeaser knew that and was merely using this tragic death to make a pithy complaint about speed cameras/speed limits. All class.

Thank goodness you’re here! Who would protect us from other people’s opinions, and decide what’s appropriate or not, if you weren’t!?

Kezza said :

Tortfeaser you have to be kidding. The Kia was stopped in the right hand lane just over the crest of the road. The driver of the Mazda didn’t have time to even break and swerved to miss the vehicle which probably saved her life and that of her passenger.

My thoughts go out to the family of the deceased.

I am pretty sure that tortfeaser knew that and was merely using this tragic death to make a pithy complaint about speed cameras/speed limits. All class.

Tortfeaser you have to be kidding. The Kia was stopped in the right hand lane just over the crest of the road. The driver of the Mazda didn’t have time to even break and swerved to miss the vehicle which probably saved her life and that of her passenger.

My thoughts go out to the family of the deceased.

more likely he was slowing down for the safety camera …..

Speed was to blame. Clearly.