Sad part had the roles been reversed the local cops ,state troopers ,sherriff , would all go on a massive manhunt to find the person responsiable. they would have adminstered all sorts of test at the arrest scene, no hospital stright to jail. but since it was a cop  ,test were not given hospital treatment was offered & important fact will go missing or interviews will not be done properly bystander account will made to look inconsitant & he will be mandated to a desk  & getting paided while the sloopy investigation is on going .all arrestting officer need to be fired for lack of common sense & that civilian killer needs to fry for vehicluar manslaughter.

Like someone else said, that cop's career is over. His department is probably going to cough up a megaton of money, too.

I skimmed the article because I'm a little short on time but, in the police academy, we were shown video after video about officer liability. One video that stands out in my head was one of an officer heading to a crime scene. He had his lights and sirens on and blaring. He rode through an area with a posted speed limit and he was going much faster than that limit (can't remember what the limit was.....). Anyway, he killed two people. His career was over. Hell, he may have been arrested. I can't remember. If he wasn't, it was because officer's get a small amount of protection based on their intent--like shooting someone because they thought a gun was involved. This situation looks like recklessness on the part of the cop. Cops have to adhere to the same laws as everyone else.

If anybody was arrested, it was to keep the peace, I'm sure. I remember going to a scene where a man died after falling from a speed boat and getting hit in the head by the propeller (so many girls in bikinis--it was the sexiest crime scene, ever!). Anyway, the guys son showed up. He was insane with grief. We had to keep the scene clear for the paramedics safety. The guy said, "I don't care what's going on. Ya'll are gonna let me see my daddy!!" I had to jump between this guy and EMS and calm him down QUICK or he was going to be arrested. Not charged, just arrested for his safety and the safety of emergency staff on the scene.

Sometimes, it's not easy being the authority.

I read the article (have more time than I thought). This article will fade from the headlines but I want someone to check up on it. I PROMISE you, that officer is up shit's creek without a paddle. He's done for. He'll possibly be charged, too. And he will definitely be tested if he hasn't been already. Unless there's some sort of different standard over there (I'm in Georgia), any accident involving a cop results in almost immediate drug testing--sometimes conducted by his own agency.

Also, if he went to the hospital, he was tested there, too. They draw blood and urine before they do anything. I promise you this. I've been the person that had to hold someone down while they stick a tube up their penis. I'm not kidding. The reporter may not have this info but, unless something is really wrong, it happened.

Uhh...derp? This is very odd, justice needs to be done.

Well, the article says "the outraged relatives ... face criminal charges."  After this publicity I think the charges will be dismissed, but still. 

Wow what country was this in? Cause those police officers are either retarded or just F**ked up bastards. I fell really sorry for the people who were sent to jail for no reason.

Cop that ran the people over needs to be sent to jail, and be forced to drop the soap daily!

As for the pandejos who arrested the family members and charged them, either fire them or unpaid leave.

Yeah, that's the thing.

Generally I find these stories always seem to break WAY too soon, with almost no facts and a lot of jumping to conclusions.

Likely the people who were arrested were out of control and needed to be controlled by police, because who WOULDN'T go berzerk if their daughter was run over.

While it seems weird that you'd expect the cop to be immediatly charged with a crime before a proper investigation had been started and witnesses properly deposed.

The whole article seems to be written to create controversy ahead of time.

And another article seems to prove my point

For those who don't want to read the whole thing.....

"Investigation takes 3 weeks, they may or may not have been at an "unmarked crosswalk" or may have been jaywalking, was on his way to a crime via the route listed.  This is why I always try and read at least 3 articles about the same story before i make a judgement.

"Several questions remain in the aftermath of the officer-involved incident in Oildale.

This much is known: Swearengin was driving west on Norris Road and the pedestrians were walking south across Norris near the intersection of Diane Drive when they were struck at around 7:30 p.m., the CHP reported.

Daniel Hiler, 24, and Chrystal Jolley, 30, died at the scene.

Several witnesses have said Swearengin was driving at a high rate of speed without lights or siren.

Authorities have not commented on that possibility. The investigation by the California Highway Patrol could take weeks, officials said.

At a press conference last Monday, Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood said Swearengin, a five-year veteran, has been placed on paid administrative leave. While the CHP conducts its investigation, he said, the Sheriff's Department will conduct an administrative investigation.

Information from the patrol vehicle's internal computer, sometimes referred to as a black box, will be analyzed by CHP investigators to determine how fast Swearengin was driving at the time of impact and whether and when he tried to brake.

Youngblood said there is no speed threshold when deputies are responding to emergencies.

But the department's emergency driving policy, which is seven pages long, is explicit.

"The safety of the deputy and the public must be the primary concern when driving under emergency conditions," the policy states.

In addition, the policy says deputies generally cannot violate traffic laws except when done in a safe manner and during Code 3 operations, meaning when utilizing lights and sirens, or while practicing generally approved patrol procedures.

According to Youngblood, Swearengin was headed to an area near Highway 65 and 7th Standard Road in response to a report of a stolen vehicle. He received the call just before 7:30 p.m.; the crash happened soon thereafter.

But that destination is miles from the accident scene on Norris Road. It seems clear that the use of emergency flashing lights on Norris would not have tipped off a perpetrator who may have been at the scene near Highway 65 and 7th Standard Road.

Authorities noted early on that the victims, Hiler and Jolley, were not in a crosswalk when they were struck by Swearengin's patrol car.

But according to the California Driver Handbook -- Laws and Rules of the Road, "most intersections have a pedestrian crosswalk whether or not lines are painted on the street."

Hiler and Jolley were crossing at or near where Diane Drive creates a T-intersection with Norris.

According to the driver handbook, most crosswalks are located at corners and that many crosswalks are not marked, including those in residential areas.

So the question remains: Could the intersection at Diane and Norris be considered an unmarked crosswalk?

http://www.bakersfield.com/news/local/x1797587204/Hit-a-pedestrian-Drivers-rarely-get-charged  "

Why didn't they test his alcohol level with a breathalyzer or whatever its called?
So being a police officer lets you get away with murder? Good to know......