View Full Version : ‘Handcuffed by policy,’ fire and police crews watch man drown
‘Handcuffed by policy,’ fire and police crews watch man drown
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110601/ts_yblog_thelookout/handcuffed-by-policy-fire-and-police-crews-watch-man-drown
"An apparently suicidal man waded into San Francisco Bay on Monday, stood up to his neck, and waited. As the man drowned, police, fire crews, and others watched idly from the shore.
Why? Officials blamed a departmental policy, stemming from budget cuts, that prevented them from jumping in to save him........................"
We're from the Government and we're here to help story.
Amazing - but at least they still have their jobs. Yes, I know it takes someone with at least a bit of water rescue training to make an attempt on someone who could flip out but still............
mark46th
06-01-2011, 18:43
Mixed emotions- If he was walking, why not walk out after him? OTOH- He did want to die.
I'd be all for helping someone as a bystander, but if I knew he suicidal and it was deep, cold, etc...Id have to be in the moment to decide if i would put my life at risk for someone who trying to kill [themselves].
wandering_idiot
06-02-2011, 12:58
A volunteer eventually pulled Zack's lifeless body from the Bay.
So even after he successfully killed himself (whether intentionally or not), it wasn't the Police, Fire, nor EMS that went in and got the body... at least, not one acting in an official capacity.
Bad Tolz
06-02-2011, 14:30
Having been on the rescuing end of some of these that almost cost me my life, I'm also aware of the typical accolades that would have appeared if the police or fire attempted an unsuccessful rescue...
"Police and Firefighter defy their policy, attempt a rescue and grossly contribute to the drowning death of a emotionally disturbed man..."
These are tragedies. At 50-55 degree water, in the San Francisco Bay, 150 yards from shore, with no flotation equipment, wet suit, or trained water rescue buddy there could have been additional victims.
It would of been great if someone drew their pistol and shot him.
....These are tragedies. At 50-55 degree water, in the San Francisco Bay, 150 yards from shore, with no flotation equipment, wet suit, or trained water rescue buddy there could have been additional victims.
Didn't seem to bother the center of attention too much. He stood in neck deep water for almost and hour.
Nobody even walk out, stay out of reach and say "Hey dude, what's up?"
Now you have to wonder if they would have stood there for a 10 year old kid.
Sorry,
I would have been in the water myself (even as an old fart) but that's just me.
............Second I guarintee if it was a kid or even an accident they would have went in. ..........
We've seen what SanFran public employees did in this situation. As to what they may do? Talk is Cheap.
Forgive my ignorance, but perhaps someone with EMT and water-based training could explain how a rescue attempt would be too dangerous.
My gut reaction would be to swim (walk?) out there and talk him down or drag him out. I know it doesn't take an hour to drown, which may indicate that this guy wasn't as 100% on board with death as he thought he was. Or maybe it just bothers me to standby and do nothing while someone dies right in front of me.
As far as gear goes, can't a few people just wade out there in life jackets with ropes attached? How can one guy, even if he fights, drown 3-4 grown men wearing PFD's? I would imagine they could each grab an arm and drag him back in.
Not being a smartass, just inquiring.
In that line of work you’ll never have all the proper equipment all of the time for every situation……......wait……...... there is one thing……......HEART!!!
Maybe these guys http://www.ci.ssf.ca.us/index.aspx?NID=719 need to hook up and learn a little bit from these guys http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=386a4-Ch7Nw.
For me this would have been an easy one. Wade out there and try to talk the guy in. You don't even have to get that close to him. If he insists on drowning himself then wait for it to happen and once he's unconscious you can hopefully locate his body and drag him to shore where you can attempt CPR. Hard to do that as a spectator from the shore.
Entire post.FWIW, the news reports indicate that the FD at the scene was from Alameda, not from South San Francisco.
1.He is committing suicide many times they dont care if they take people with them. In fact sometimes they try to.
2. Was he armed? You dont know he may have had a knife.
3. As you move tword him in the neck deep water he may head to deeper water and you go after him.
4. Where do you get the PFD at? They are not standard gear on a fire truck.Even then they are rated to keep ONE person afloat, special ones are needed to carry the weight of two espically a 200+ pound guy.
5.Was he on drugs or just a bad ass of some sort, fighting an unarmed person in deep water is a life or death deal, drowning can easily happen.
6. Legally if he refuses service they can not do anything until someone places a hold under the California Penal Code 5150. If they do provide servise they can be charged with Ca penal code (PC) 240 Assault and 242 Battery as well as kidnapping. It also opens the rescuers up to civil charges even if the DA decides not to file. See link below.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=240-248
A 5150 hold is a 72 hour hold if the person is a danger to their self such as this case, a danger to others or gravely disabled.
Now the cops on scene could have placed him under a 5150 hold then the rescue team could legally rescue the guy, but it does not negate the other problems. Remember the media is about selling papers not telling the truth. I am sure they tried to talk him out. I doubt they said screw it go ahead while having a BBQ and drinking beer.
Oh yea, I forgot to mention the pacific ocean there is about 40-45 deg so you are hypothermic in a short time without special gear that is NOT carried on a fire truck normally. Remember after this call they dont go home, there are other calls after this one.
Brush Okie thank you for the clarification.
If I may play devil's advocate for a moment. Please humor me:
I don't live in San Francisco, but I have to imagine that there was a small enough boat of some kind nearby. I know it may not be department issue, may be a little unconventional, and may open the city up to lawsuit(?), but I'm sure there must have been a boat retailer or civilian nearby that would be glad to lend a boat to rescue someone.
Police and EMS bring themselves into danger quite often, as you are personally familiar with.
Would it have been unreasonable to borrow a boat (or PFD's from a hopefully nearby shop) and bring out say 2 EMS guys and 2 police officers to lift out and restrain this man even if he is armed with a knife or on drugs? Tase him, drag his ass in, cuff his hands and feet and paddle or motor back to shore.
FWIW, the news reports indicate that the FD at the scene was from Alameda, not from South San Francisco.
Who gives a shit, one of the FD’s between the Bay bridge and the San Mateo could have done something.
Probably too busy arguing about whose jurisdiction it was. :rolleyes:
Who gives a shit, one of the FD’s between the Bay bridge and the San Mateo could have done something.
Probably too busy arguing about whose jurisdiction it was. :rolleyes:IMO, this frame of mind validates every broad generalization and act of second guessing civilians want to make about LEOs and first responders.
There's a difference between critical inquiry and throwing stones blindly.
A man is dead, for whatever reason he chose to forsake the gift of life. I wasn't there, I do halibut fish in the SF Bay on average 20-25 times a year, even close to shore, the waters are cold and treacherous. First Responders are human like anyone else, those with a sense of duty, probably have an even harder time watching someone die. At the same time that man was someone's son, if he was my kin, the policy due to budget cuts explanation would be the last thing a family wants to hear. Pete's point about if he was a kid would change everything in my book.
While this was not a tragedy on the scale of Columbine or Mumbai, First Responders were criticized for their conduct in those instances as well, the result was changes in training and policy, which subsequently likely saved lives at Ft. Hood.
Prayers out for his family, hopefully this incident net saves lives in the future, instead of symbolizing the dangers of the self destructive fiscal and policy trends evident in California.
Easy to throw stones when you were not there.
Easy to stand there - with 74 others.
IMO, this frame of mind validates every broad generalization and act of second guessing civilians want to make about LEOs and first responders.
There's a difference between critical inquiry and throwing stones blindly.
IMHO first responders watching a man drown is the validation not my comments on PS.com.
If you want to compare the two, have at it.
I’m done.
Nobody thought to call the Coast Guard? They are rather good at this kind of thing and have those whirligig gizmos so they can get there quick.
Pat
Source is here (http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18201451?nclick_check=1).Alameda: City Council to look at drowning death
By Peter Hegarty
Oakland Tribune
Posted: 06/03/2011 03:33:36 PM PDT
Updated: 06/03/2011 03:33:37 PM PDT
ALAMEDA -- The City Council will review the circumstances surrounding the death of Raymond Zack, who waded into San Francisco Bay and intentionally drowned himself as police and firefighters watched from shore, when it meets Tuesday.
The decision to review what happened at Robert Crown Memorial State Beach on Memorial Day follows Mayor Marie Gilmore announcing that the city would conduct an investigation into the emergency response.
Meanwhile, an exact cause of death of the 52-year-old Zack has not been determined because results from a toxicology report are still pending, a spokesman for the Alameda County coroner's bureau said Friday. The results will take several weeks.
Zack waded into the water fully clothed about 11:30 a.m. and gradually walked farther and farther from shore, witnesses said.
Police and firefighters -- who were dispatched after a 911 caller reported that Zack was suicidal -- did not communicate with Zack and remained on the beach, even after he began floating face down, witnesses said.
Police said they did not enter the water because the Alameda resident was suicidal and possibly armed or dangerous. Firefighters said they did not go out because they are no longer certified in shore-based or surface-water rescue due to budget cuts.
A passer-by eventually pulled Zack's body to shore about an hour after he entered the water near Shoreline Drive and Willow Street. He was pronounced dead at Alameda Hospital.
Tuesday's meeting begins at 7 p.m. at City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Ave.
Other items on the agenda include a public hearing on collecting delinquent business license taxes, collecting delinquent fines for property code violations and collecting delinquent bills for waste management
accounts.Nobody thought to call the Coast Guard? They are rather good at this kind of thing and have those whirligig gizmos so they can get there quick.
PatPat--
From an earlier story. (Yahoo! news seems to go for the sensational aspects of the story instead of the complete story.) Source is here (http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18177414?nclick_check=1).The U.S. Coast Guard was notified at 11:34 a.m. -- or three minutes after dispatchers received the 911 call saying Zack was in the water threatening suicide -- and launched a 25-foot response boat from Yerba Buena Island and a helicopter from Air Station San Francisco, officials said.
The boat could not reach Zack because the water was too shallow, Coast Guard Petty Officer Erik Swanson said. The helicopter was initially delayed because it needed to refuel.
The helicopter was initially delayed because it needed to refuel.
Must have been a busy day. CG helicopters don't patrol and refueling doesn't take very long anyway. The 25' boat, was it a sailboat? Any CG 25' power boat should have been capable of getting close enough. Their job is to save lives. They don't just throw up their hands and say, "Sorry, too shallow".
ETA: "Initially delayed." Was it delayed again later or did it make it to the scene and just watch?
Pat
Must have been a busy day. CG helicopters don't patrol and refueling doesn't take very long anyway. The 25' boat, was it a sailboat? Any CG 25' power boat should have been capable of getting close enough. Their job is to save lives. They don't just throw up their hands and say, "Sorry, too shallow".
ETA: "Initially delayed." Was it delayed again later or did it make it to the scene and just watch?
Pat
While I agree with the majority of what you have said, I would have to disagree with you about the CG not patrolling. I live on the other side of the Santa Monica Bay from where you are, and I see the CG helos fly by several times a day. One just a few minutes ago, in fact. Perhaps they do it differently in the SF Bay.
Susie
While I agree with the majority of what you have said, I would have to disagree with you about the CG not patrolling. I live on the other side of the Santa Monica Bay from where you are, and I see the CG helos fly by several times a day. One just a few minutes ago, in fact. Perhaps they do it differently in the SF Bay.
Susie
If you see them flying, they are on a mission or training. USCG Air LAX operates out of the hanger I used to work at when I was with Golden West Airlines. I've visited them many times. They are fueled and on standby like fire fighters. They can't waste fuel patrolling; they cover a very large area. BTW, they don't have just one whirlybird. ;)
Pat
Not to be rude, but according to the Coast Guard, they do all three: missions, training, and patrolling. My point is that I am surprised that they were not able to respond since it seems that they are in the air a lot (at least down here). Again, perhaps it is different in SF area. Moot point really. They guy got his wish and he is dead. I do feel bad for his family.
P.S. I know they have multiple aircraft. I used to see a lot of the Dolphin helos, but lately they have been using the Jayhawks more. ;)
Not to be rude, but according to the Coast Guard, they do all three: missions, training, and patrolling. My point is that I am surprised that they were not able to respond since it seems that they are in the air a lot (at least down here). Again, perhaps it is different in SF area. Moot point really. They guy got his wish and he is dead. I do feel bad for his family.
No problem. Your not being rude. They do patrol, but not with HH65s except at special maritime events. You live near LAX. CG Air departs, and often returns, along the coast north and south. Their hangar is on the west side of the LAX complex. They are often called by local Baywatch for assistance, but they are not on patrol.
In this case, if Air Station SFO was called as they admit that they were, I've got a problem. I highly respect the USCG, but this needs to be explained...by many agencies.
Pat
wandering_idiot
06-13-2011, 02:36
Apparently the Alameda residents want an investigation done:
ALAMEDA (KCBS) – A group of Alameda residents waded into the Bay on Sunday to demonstrate just how easy it would have been to save an at-risk man bent on suicide on Memorial Day.
53-year-old Raymond Zack waded into the Bay off Crown Memorial State Beach on May 30. First responders said there was nothing they could do since they weren’t properly trained and allowed Zack to drown.
It was later revealed that the Alameda Fire Department had set aside money for such training.
Rosemary McNally spent 15 minutes in the water on Sunday to make her point.
“I believe something should have been done,” she said. “I want to show that the water is fairly calm, shallow and warm.”
David Howard helped organize the event and said the drowning is nothing for the city to be proud of.
“It was shocking for a lot of people to hear the statements that Interim Fire Chief Mike D’Orazi made after the incident about budget cuts being a problem,” Howard said. “Those have been proved false. The memo that Chief D’Orazi cited saying there was budget cuts proved to be wrong. At the end of that memo, it says budget funding has been reapproved.”
Alameda officials have remained silent on the issue as demands for an independent investigation grow.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/06/12/alameda-residents-%E2%80%98wade-out%E2%80%99-in-bay-to-protest-suicide-response/#.TfU57kpIruc;facebook