The Kansas Highway Patrol has stepped up its enforcement efforts near a construction site east of Emporia where 20-year-old Rachel Hall died earlier this month.
The accident happened when a cement truck driver failed to yield right-of-way to the Hall vehicle and struck it broadside at the intersection of County Roads U and 175.
Residents around Roads S, U, 200 and 175 have complained for several months that heavy dust and repeated traffic violations have made driving hazardous in the area. Lyon County Sheriff’s officers have been patrolling there and responding to calls from the public about traffic. State officers also are helping in the effort to make roads safer in the construction area.
“...(T)he KHP has also added some extra patrol on CR 175,” said KHP Technical Trooper Jeffrey Norling.
He and four other troopers have spent hours “at the area watching, waiting for violators,” he said. Almost no one committed an infraction.
Norling said that during that time, he stopped the driver of a semi-tractor trailer for rolling through a stop sign.
“He was actually an over-the-road driver bringing (rebar) into the plant for cement work, not one of the ‘regulars’ that frequent the site,” he said.
Two of the other four troopers did not see any violations, and the remainder handled one or two. Norling does not doubt, however, that the violations are taking place when law enforcement is not present.
“We can’t be there all the time,” he said. “That’s why we do depend on people to call and report ... to us.”
He offered several suggestions to the public for helping law enforcement locate violators:
F Get a detailed description of the vehicle and driver.
F Include color, make, model, year, number of occupants and direction of travel.
F If the complainant knows the driver, provide that information and address, if possible, to law enforcement.
F If the vehicle is a commercial vehicle, get the company name and, if possible, the vehicle number (usually located on the side of the truck hood.)
F Get an accurate time and date of the violation.
F Do not attempt to catch the violators or contact them, to avoid “road rage” incidents that could cause injuries.
“Remember that we all cannot be at the location 24/7, and that by getting a track record of the usual times and locations of where (and) when complaints come in, we can increase our patrols to those times to be most effective,” Norling said.
“... The better information we have, the better chance we’re going to get the right vehicle contacted and the problem possibly taken care of.”
Heavy truck traffic around the peaking plant construction is expected to continue through completion of the concrete work, road construction and the power plant itself in 2009.
“(I) can only hope that through education and our presence, people will follow the law,” Norling said. “Enough people have died — Rachel Hall — to make me think people do know it can happen to them.”
dayjob55 (anonymous) says...
Right on Snake. Too many people "roll" through stop signs in both the county & the city but I guess it's all in who you are (or how much money you have) as to whether or not you get away with everything around here. And you can bet you bottom dollar (if there is a dollar left to bet) that not much of that money will stay here - during construction or after.
July 23, 2007 at 4:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
daveedailey (anonymous) says...
Dayjob and snake I am listening and I hear both of you and I do agree. I have been saying all along that Emporia is all in who you are and how much money "you can swing under the table".
July 23, 2007 at 5:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Doug (anonymous) says...
Maybe I missed something, Didn't Officer Norling stop the semi that rolled through the stop sign??
July 23, 2007 at 5:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
midnight_rider (anonymous) says...
Drove out the old highway the other day. The only officer I saw was sitting out in plain sight. No wonder they are not catching any violators.
July 23, 2007 at 6:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
siamesefred (anonymous) says...
I took Trooper Norling's comment to mean that, while officers were watching, the "regulars" were making sure to stop. An out-of-town trucker, however, needed education, which is what he got when Norling stopped him.
I don't believe that officers are letting out-of-town truckers slide.
And I agree with the statement that locals and nonlocals both run stop signs. A few years ago, a corner in our neck of the woods suddenly got 2 stop signs after our road became a temporary detour. It was very difficult to stop after years of slowing down and looking both ways (there's good visibility on both sides). More locals ran the stop sign than did nonlocals on the detour.
July 24, 2007 at 7:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
midnight_rider (anonymous) says...
Get Real - What do you mean by education. Even kids know what a STOP sign means. Local or non-local. A STOP sign is a STOP sign. It's comes back to the basics of being responsible, driving in a safe, reasonable manor, knowing that you are not the only person driving on the roads. NEWS FLASH - Truckers do not own the roads, they do not need educated on the meaning of STOP.
July 24, 2007 at 7:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
cepperly (anonymous) says...
First off, I appreciate your comments, but don't sit hear and critisize law enforcement because we can't catch everybody running the stop sign. And for the individual who saw the officer sitting in "plain view", give us some advices as to how we can become invisible and we will ablige... Just being present and in the area deters a lot of crime. Some one who stopped at the stop sign and saw an officer present, in the back of his mind is questioning to him/her self if the officer is around and will more than likely stop at the stop sign just because they saw the officer there last time. Furthermore, if you think we are out here to stop and harrass locals, you are greatly mistaking. I have been here for 8 years working for the Patrol and it would appear locals get more breaks than out of staters... You may feel locals get harrassed more becasue its more publisized and YOU yourself may have been a victim to a citation. Cry me a river... Come do a ride along and see how much local violations are "overlooked" and you will see.
I am sure if Trp Norling stopped that truck, what ever enforcement he felt necessary was sufficiant. Believe it or not, warning tickets do the same thing as citations if it keeps people from commiting traffic violations.
Remember, Lyon county has two regular road troopers and a K9 trooper (me) and the way I see it, you need to call your legislature and fill their ear as to why we don't have more troopers in the area.
I hope this info helps your conversation. If you have any comments, email me at cepperly@khp.ks.gov. I will not respond to any emails that are anonymous as they hold no merit if you can't put your name behind your mouth...
Clint Epperly
July 24, 2007 at 12:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
KristieR (anonymous) says...
I'm not defending anyone who ROLLS through a stop sign, it is illegal, but to me..........a roll is not the same as blowing through a stop sign at 60 mph. If the dust is bad in that area, it's quite possible they didn't even know a stop sign was coming. Are there rumble strips in the blacktop to signal a stop ahead? How often do you find yourself driving in an unfamiliar area and miss your exit? Miss a sign? To me, that's what they meant by "not a regular" driver, didn't know the area.
A rolling stop is a term used in traffic law to refer to when a vehicle fails to come to a complete stop. A complete stop is when there is no forward momentum and the needle on the speedometer is at 0. In a rolling stop, the car wheels are still in motion and the car is moving at less than 5 m.p.h. Failing to come to a complete stop at a stop sign is a traffic violation governed by state laws, which vary by state. The longer the stop, the more discernable it is to the naked eye, giving a motorist a better chance of avoiding a ticket.
July 24, 2007 at 2:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
KristieR (anonymous) says...
To clarify - The driver who hit Rachel's vehicle missed the stop sign completely and broadsided her.
The driver of this article did a rolling stop.
Two different things, yet snake is saying it's the same.
"OFFICER NORDLING, may I remind you that, that is the reason she died, that some driver who was not from this area rolled through a STOP SIGN, what part of that do you not understand?????"
July 24, 2007 at 2:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
cepperly (anonymous) says...
KristieR, it sounds to me like you are blaming Trooper Norling for the results of the fatality... So, since you are into the law, I would like to see case law, case briefs, or state statutes that clearly define these terms you are refering to. A complete stop is exactly what it is... No more or no less. I am taking it personally (and Jeff may as well) that you are holding him acountable for the truck driver failing to stop. I can assure, Trp Norling is tough against truck drivers who do not obey the law and can assure he took the appropriate steps, within his power, to ensure they are not violated again. Now, unfortunately, our society and government is mostly reactive as opposed to proactive. Meaning, it takes a tragety to enact law or have certain issues brought to light. I have worked my share of fatality accidents and number one, it is hard enough to tell the parents that their child is not comming home due to a vehicle crash and then have you blame law enforcement for no preventing it. So, don't sit there behind your computer and criticize us for stepping up enforcement and then in the same breath hold us accounable for a tragic event. Give me your number and I will call you and have you witness my next death notification and you may have a change of heart. Again, my email is cepperly@khp.ks.gov.
Clint
July 24, 2007 at 3:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
johncanyon (anonymous) says...
I guess I missed the part of the article that stated that Trooper Norling gave the driver a warning. It only stated the Trooper stopped the driver because he rolled through a stop sign. Nowhere in the article did it say that Norling did or did not give him a ticket.
Does any one here know for a fact that Trooper Norling did not issue this driver a citation? Or are you just assuming he didn't so you can have something else to complain about?
July 24, 2007 at 3:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
KristieR (anonymous) says...
Actually, I'm holding NO ONE accountable for the accident that killed Rachel other than the driver of the truck who did not stop at all. I'm actually defending Norling for citing the driver for the rolling stop. I'm trying to clarify (for Snake) the difference between a rolling stop and what happened to Rachel. You might want to reread my post. You might be misinterpreting the very last two lines, those are not my words, they are Snakes. I'm actually on your side.
I'm also of a mind that we are responsible for our own actions when driving. I have been lucky enough to avoid accidents because I didn't trust the other driver to follow the signs/laws.
July 24, 2007 at 3:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
siamesefred (anonymous) says...
Trooper Epperly,
I believe you misunderstood KristiR's last post. The final line that begins "OFFICER NORDLING" is a direct quote from snake's post in which he took exception to Trooper Norling's comment.
I don't read anything in KristiR's post that blames law enforcement for the fatality accident. Instead, I see her trying to add clarification to the discussion.
July 24, 2007 at 3:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
cepperly (anonymous) says...
If that is the case, I appologize, but law enforcement officers mostly take critisism and spend a lot of time defending our actions. I was not aware you were quoting another post. The, maybe, snake needs to be educated on the issues.
July 24, 2007 at 3:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
KristieR (anonymous) says...
And, I don't really care if Trp Norling gave the guy a ticket or a warning. I'm sure he used his best judgment. If the guy had a clean driving record, a warning should suffice.
BTW, one of my best friends was killed at the age of 18 when a dump truck broadsided her car going 60 mph. No one needs to tell me what death looks like.
July 24, 2007 at 3:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
KristieR (anonymous) says...
Clint - No harm, no foul. It's not easy to follow the discussion, especially when Snake gets going.
K
July 24, 2007 at 3:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
cepperly (anonymous) says...
Just to let everyone know, that we recieved ANOTHER email and there will be more law enforcement precense there. Unfortunately, this pulls us off of other high priority areas such as the turnpike construction. Its only a matter or time before we have a major pile up there. Everybody just drive carefull and never have the mindset the other driver sees you.
July 24, 2007 at 4:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MelissaE (anonymous) says...
Clint, I completely understand your statement that the gov't is reactive instead of proactive. It seems to apply to more than just laws these days.
I commend you on your service. Having several family members in law enforcement, I understand your point of view and think it's a shame for anyone to blame you--you don't make the laws.
Kristie--I understood your post and agree with what you wrote to Clint--it's difficult to follow these discussions when people are ranting and raving instead of providing solutions.
M
July 24, 2007 at 4:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pollyanna (anonymous) says...
WOW. I wish more law enforcement were present on I-35 south where the speed limit is 40 due to construction. I'm on that road twice a day and really try to go the speed limit (been cited for speeding already this year so I'm trying to watch the pedal..) but it feels like I am the ONLY one slowing down through there. I do see lots of speeding tickets issued I'm guessing in that area, (just by reading the paper) but I'd really like to witness someone being pulled over!! I know law enforcement is already thin in most areas and I appreciate all the work you all do on a daily basis. Cepperly-keep up the good work and being passionate about law enforcement!
July 24, 2007 at 4:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biggest_small_townKS (anonymous) says...
While I agree and disagree on some points with most everyone that has posted so far, what we all need to keep in mind is that a very tragic death (aren't they all in these instances) has occurred and there are likely to be friends and family of the victim (Rachel) veiwing the posts to the various articles. We should all be mindful of their grief and suffering.
Discussion is helpful only if it leads to solutions, Rachel's death is meaningful only if it saves anothers' life. Law enforcement being the reactive bureaucracy that they are can now get out and "do something" since a fatality accident has now occurred and it is justified to respond to residents comlaints and concerns, whereas these were ignored for the last how many years? That's the way it usually works unfortunately, but I'm all for it if it saves someone else, especially if that someone else might be your relative or friend.
On another note, was the truck driver even cited for a traffic violation as a result of the accident? The gazette sure has not bothered to report what is public information.... If I or any of you get a ticket, you can bet it will be headlined tomorrow in the daily report. Better yet, are there any criminal charges being poffered against the truck driver, who essentially commited murder/ manslaughter? Law enforcement can do the best job in the world, but they can't make the county attorney do his job; and we all need to not lose sight of this while we are on the "who you are, who you know and how much pull you have discussion". We'll stay tuned to see how "spot on" this is. The county attorney may find himself in between a rock and a hard place and actually have to do his job.
Rachel was a VICTIM and unfortunately the ones who will suffer the most will be her 3 children (all under the age of 3) and their father and their families.
July 24, 2007 at 11:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
brent (anonymous) says...
My name is Brent Price. I am an investigator working for the family of Rachel Hall. I would like to hear from anyone with knowledge of bad driving in the area of Rachel's accident.
brent@shuttlesworthmoore.net
August 21, 2007 at 11:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )