What's the PCF?

[bk23103]

Here's one for the motor jockeys out there.

One fine morning, a methamphibean stole a 25' wooden utility pole from a PG&E yard and chained it to the back of his Chevy Malibu to take it home several miles away for... firewood?

Anyway, the pole being dragged behind the car withered around like a snake and struck several parked cars, causing extensive damage.

So the obvious question here... What's the PCF?

[p7m8jg]

Haven't heard PCF in years. Decades even.

Howsabout:

CVC 23103(A) - reckless driving endangering others

[Rustlin’ Jack]

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ctionNum=24002

24002.
(a) It is unlawful to operate any vehicle or combination of vehicles which is in an unsafe condition, or which is not safely loaded, and which presents an immediate safety hazard

[bk23103]

Originally Posted by Rustlin’ Jack

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...ctionNum=24002

That was my first thought too. I've been off the street for a decade but someone tried to say it was a 594 and to kick it back to patrol.

[Rustlin’ Jack]

Originally Posted by bk23103

That was my first thought too. I've been off the street for a decade but someone tried to say it was a 594 and to kick it back to patrol.

With intent, yes.
Merely driving with head up where the sun don?t shine, no.

[painkiller]

My retired motors buddy said cvc 23103 reckless is pcf, but if found on dui meth then then pcf is 23142(f)

[Rustlin’ Jack]

Originally Posted by painkiller

My retired motors buddy said cvc 23103 reckless is pcf, but if found on dui meth then then pcf is 23142(f)

Agreed. I skipped right to PCF for the act of damaging cars with the swinging pole. If impaired, the impairment becomes primary with the unsecured load as secondary.

[painkiller]

Edit to response above, 23152f

[BigStiCK]

Id go with 23114 Unsecured Load. A bit more specific than 24002.

[bk23103]

Turns out there were some errors in my theoretical question. It was 50' long, and the involved vehicle was a Subaru. Of course, someone got pinched for meth, too.

https://www.bakersfield.com/news/man...c78f33027.html

“The Bakersfield Police Department would like to take this opportunity to stress to the public that dragging 50’ poles weighing in excess of 1,000 pounds with chains along city roadways is dangerous and against the law,” the news release said.

[L-2]

I wasn't a traffic guy so VC 22350 (the only safe speed would be zero mph) excessive speed.

[pacrat]

Gentlemen;

Is there any policy that keeps a motor officer from charging pc-487 ? As well as the various options under the VC? According to an Edison employee buddy. Those poles cost several thousand dollars each.

Disclaimer; .... I acknowledge being a simple LE supporting concerned citizen. With no professional LE affiliation. So feel free to ignore my questions.

[bk23103]

Originally Posted by pacrat

Gentlemen;

Is there any policy that keeps a motor officer from charging pc-487 ? As well as the various options under the VC? According to an Edison employee buddy. Those poles cost several thousand dollars each.

Disclaimer; .... I acknowledge being a simple LE supporting concerned citizen. With no professional LE affiliation. So feel free to ignore my questions.

Not at all, so long as there's a victim wishing to pursue it.

The PCF is the "Primary Collision Factor" though - so the driver in this instance was arrested for various charges, but the CVC violation that caused the accident(s) is what is up for debate here.

[pacrat]

Originally Posted by bk23103

[1] ... Not at all, so long as there's a victim wishing to pursue it.

[2] ... The PCF is the "Primary Collision Factor" though - so the driver in this instance was arrested for various charges, but the CVC violation that caused the accident(s) is what is up for debate here.

Thank you;

[1] ... Wouldnt 594 also require a victim to make it stick?

[2] ... I understand the PCF element. You earlier mentioned pc 594, and handing it to patrol. I didnt understand the [kick it back to patrol].

someone tried to say it was a 594 and to kick it back to patrol.

And vandalism can be a wobbler. So my thought was to go ahead and tie his dick in a knot with a felony.

[Enzo rules]

Good question and some great answers. Not being a motorhead and off the streets for over 20 years I have a question. Since the pole was stolen during the act of a grand theft, the trailer, is the hitting of the cars an TC. If it’s a TC I’m thinking unsafe load.

[pacrat]

Went back and read the article link. Got this;

BPD reported the utility pole belonged to PG&E and it was about to be installed. It added PG&E declined to proceed with any criminal charges.

Another few questions if you dont mind. ....

It is my understanding that a LEO must witness infractions and misdemeanors, with certain exceptions on the latter, related to victims willing to pursue charges.

But felonies can be arrested, charged, and made to stick, with solid PC, and evidence that the subject actually committed the felony. Without a victim filing a complaint?

Please enlighten me if that is incorrect.

If this clown was charged with either 594 or 487 as felonies. Would a victim complaint, be required to get a conviction? Especially since the PG&E employee witnessed the theft, reported it, and was available for subpoenaed testimony. Whether PG&E pursued the matter or not?

No way this clown could ever make a judge believe he was innocent. That somebody else must have tied the 50 Ft log to his car, that he drove several miles through town, without him knowing it.

Or is it likely, IYO, that an ADA would just reject it. Due to lack of interest on PG&Es part?

[Rustlin’ Jack]

From leginfo:

836.
(a) A peace officer may arrest a person in obedience to a warrant, or, pursuant to the authority granted to him or her by Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, without a warrant, may arrest a person whenever any of the following circumstances occur:
(1) The officer has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense in the officer’s presence.

(2) The person arrested has committed a felony, although not in the officer’s presence.

(3) The officer has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a felony, whether or not a felony, in fact, has been committed.

All crimes in California are actually committed against the state. As long as the prosecutor can show that there is a victim, the crime can be prosecuted, whether the victim supports a complaint, or not. The most obvious example is a murder. There is a victim, but the victim is unable to testify in their own behalf.

Regarding the charge of 594 PC, the prosecutor would need to prove intent by the suspect to damage other property. The grand theft charge is a no-brainer in this case.

Prosecutors are generally reluctant to charge crimes, unless they have a victim, who is cooperative and willing to testify. Domestic violence cases are another example of felonies that are prosecuted, regardless of whether the victim is supportive of prosecution or not.

[pacrat]

Originally Posted by Rustlin’ Jack

From leginfo:



All crimes in California are actually committed against the state. As long as the prosecutor can show that there is a victim, the crime can be prosecuted, whether the victim supports a complaint, or not. The most obvious example is a murder. There is a victim, but the victim is unable to testify in their own behalf.

Regarding the charge of 594 PC, the prosecutor would need to prove intent by the suspect to damage other property. The grand theft charge is a no-brainer in this case.

Prosecutors are generally reluctant to charge crimes, unless they have a victim, who is cooperative and willing to testify. Domestic violence cases are another example of felonies that are prosecuted, regardless of whether the victim is supportive of prosecution or not.

The bolded are as I understood. But was not sure of.

Thanks for your concise accurate answers Jack.

DA discretion can often be a fickle thing. Especially in Ca with liberalism chewing away at our justice system. I applaud the ADAs that are standing up, and suing leftist DA clowns like Gascon for his failure to even allow them to do their jobs. But that is OT for this thread, and just my opinion.

Be Safe

[Luis650ar15]

When in doubt........PCF is always speed! Sounds like he was driving way too fast to navigate the roadway, dragging a huge telephone pole lol

[Ron-Solo]

11550 H&S, tweeking in a no tweek zone has got to come into play also, but not a PCF.