Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Collision sends officer to hospital

Murdoch incident being investigated by local officials

August 23, 2013

PARKERSBURG — A collision between a Parkersburg police cruiser and a civilian vehicle Thursday morning is under investigation....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Sep-17-13 4:39 PM

If you witnessed this accident and witnessed the police car traveling at a high rate of speed without his sirens on please email kevin_allman@yahoo****, your statement would be helpful. thank you.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-26-13 8:03 AM

FYY, are you yet another of 4thebetter's many alter egos?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-24-13 9:03 AM

clipboard: Where in the article does it say the Grand Am pulled out into the center lane in front of the cruiser. If your refering to the WTAP article, it is wrong also, because it said the Grand Am struck the police cruiser. So between both articles, the only thing we know for sure is that the cruiser struck the Grand Am in the rear end. Until the investigation is complete, we won't really know what happened. Everyone is guessing.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 4:44 PM

RitMOV, name calling takes all credibility away from your comments.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 4:23 PM

"Gam" if the grand am would have just be "rear ended" yes it would be the car in the back at fault. HOWEVER when the grand am pulls out into oncoming traffic ... To the center lane ... In front of an emergency vehicle running lights and sirens .... It's not the fault of the rear car. It is a violation if u pull in front of oncoming traffic causing a collision AND a violation to turn directly into the center lane.

5 Agrees | 11 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 4:02 PM

I drove by the scene of the accident. If this had occurred between two civilian drivers, wouldn't the fault ALWAYS be attributed to the car that rear-ended the other car? Hmmmmmmm.

Since the Grand AM appeared to be totaled, if that driver was not hurt at all, THAT was a miracle!

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 2:20 PM

I personally have made several comments regarding prayers for everyone involved. That would include the other driver. This is so ridiculous. Do any of you have a clue that the collision actually busted the system that controls the lights and siren...therefor they WOULDN'T work after the crash? So....he couldn't have turned them on afterwords. To bad everyone can't follow the golden rule of treat others the way you want to be treated. I'd you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. Think what kind of world we would live in if we could all do that.

9 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 2:06 PM

I hope and pray the truth comes out as to what actually happened.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 2:05 PM

Why no compassion for the other driver? After all, when you get rear ended so hard that your car spins around in the road then lands on the sidewalk, this driver needs all the support and compassion that we can give. This person was hit with so much force I'm surprised but thankful the driver wasn't killed. Good grief people, I heard the police officer turned on his lights "after" the crash.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 1:16 PM

RealityintheMOV, when you call people names your comments loose all credibility.

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 12:56 PM

I am glad that the officer is okay~~that everyone is okay.

Beyond that, I cannot say anything at the moment. I have to really think about my comment, because I have an issue with it and I don't want to go off "half-cocked".

Presently, I am in an "I hate the city admin mode", but at the same time, I usually support the PD.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 10:47 AM

the utility poles are very close. It may be highly likey the Grand Am had no place to go.

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 9:48 AM

soarwith: I see forthebetter changed his name again. No matter how many times you change your name, you never change the way you write.

12 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 8:21 AM

The idea here is to be impartial, I agree with the person who said have an outside department investigate. I am not making a determination but even police must use diligence in driving to include use of radio or cell phone. I see an outside investigation happening and probably a lawsuit involved personally, but hopefully the truth will come out either way.

11 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 7:47 AM

Again, even if you want to assume you know and assume the officer was on his phone .... per code HE IS ALLOWED to be!! And also the wreck happened in the center lane. The center lane where the exiting car turned directly into the center lane which is itself a violation.

5 Agrees | 13 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 7:36 AM

did this crash happen in the curb lane? you don't run code 3 in the curb lane

11 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 7:12 AM

Don't be surprised if this is the first and last we hear of this.

15 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 6:22 AM

Mr. Whaton and the Wood count crash team need to excuse themselves from this case. The crash team normally has Parkersburg officers on it and Wharton works closley with them also. To truly be impartial, the state police need to investigate, a special prosecutor appointed, and the over needs placed on desk duty until it is done. I know the law states emergency crews do not need handless devices but crll phone rexords need pulled for both involved. If the officer can not prove and his phone will tell.them that he was not using one. Then council and The department need to take responsibility for the crash and order all officers are required to use them. Officers are meant to be examples for the public.

16 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 5:47 AM

"impeachobama" you're joking right? "how far up murdock does (parkersburg) police jurisdiciton"

5 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 5:43 AM

how far up murdock does parkersburg police jurisdiciton

5 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 5:41 AM

the cop hit them in the rear end what else do they need he was probably on his cell phone and not paying attention....

16 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 3:25 AM

looks like your normal rear end collision(from the pics),which usually gets you a failure to control..maybe the guy he hit had nowhere to get out of his way.

16 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-23-13 1:44 AM

@ soarwith totally agree. Now let's sit back and watch the cop bashers start their ranting and raving. Still glad no serious injuries.

5 Agrees | 19 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 23 of 23 comments


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web