# New Jersey Troopers, Firefighters Butt Heads



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

*PAUL PELUSO*
_Officer.Com News_

*ROCKYAWAY TOWNSHIP, N.J.--* A deputy fire chief from New Jersey ended up in handcuffs in what boiled down to a power struggle between Rockaway Township's Volunteer Fire Department and state police the night of Nov. 26. 
At approximately 8:44 p.m., police received a call of a single vehicle rollover on Route 80, according to New Jersey State Police spokesman Capt. Al Della Fave. He said that as soon as troopers arrived, people inside of the wrecked Nissan Maxima were out and there were no apparent injuries besides a passenger who complained of back pains. 
When an ambulance was called from Rockaway Township, Fave says things started to get out of hand. The department sent the ambulance along with two fire trucks. As the department arrived on the scene the right-hand lane was blocked off to protect the emergency workers. 
The trooper on the scene, however, ordered the truck to be moved. Rockaway's Fire Chief Joe Mason described what would follow as "a screaming match." 
"It's pretty black and white, there's not much of a grey area," he said. "What's important is the safety of our department. Police felt that was not acceptable." 
When 53-year-old Deputy Chief Robert Jenkins refused to relocate the truck, he was arrested and charged with disobeying a state trooper and disorderly conduct. He is due back in court Nov. 30. 
The truck's driver, Firefighter David Bell, also was charged with disobeying a state trooper. 
"There was no extraction necessary and no fire involved. We asked them to move and they didn't comply." Della Fave said. "We never called for fire apparatus; we only called for first-aid," 
Rockaway's Fire Chief Joe Mason said the firefighters were just following protocol. "We run our own fire department ambulances," he said. "When it's a call for a rollover, when send a heavy rescue and an engine. That's something that's not going to change if they call tomorrow." 
According to Della Fave, since Route 80 is a state highway, the troopers had jurisdiction of the accident scene. The New Jersey Department of Transportation deferred comment to the state police. 
Mason believes that it was a matter of the safety of his firefighters. "It's one of those things where we need a written protocol that (states) if a fire department is called, a lane is allowed to be closed off. When someone gets hit, it's too late." 
Della Fave pointed out that the speed of the traffic on the road -- reaching up to speeds of 70 mph -- and a lack of visibility supported the trooper's decision. He said no flares or cones were used to mark the scene. He also noted that the accident scene was close to 30 feet off of the road and that drivers would not have noticed the accident if it weren't for the fire department. 
Despite the state police's stance, Mason said his department won't back down from Jenkins' charges. "Naturally we feel that they are not justified, but we will deal with it," he said. "It is just like two kids in a sandbox; they have their side of it and we have ours." 
One thing both sides agreed on was how unusual the situation was. 
"This is the first time that it's come up; it was a unique situation for all of us," Mason said. "We work with them all the time." 
Della Fave, who has been a spokesperson with the department for 13 years, said it is the first time he has seen anything like this. He said following the incident that State Police Lt. Kenneth Villano spoke with Mason about the incident. 
"Those two individuals are committed to talking in the future to make sure something like this won't happen again," Della Fave said. 
While Mason said it might be premature to set up a meeting with the state police, he does believe an open dialogue will help improve interaction in the future. 
"I think a little better communication between the police and the fire department would help," he said. "We are looking forward to working in the future with the New Jersey State Police. We have had a good rapport and hope this was an isolated incident."

Read more about the story in The Daily Record.


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

cops 1
firemen 0


----------



## Andy0921 (Jan 12, 2006)

94c said:


> cops 1
> firemen 0


:L:


----------



## Blueflu1 (Jan 22, 2006)

We have all been there. FD arrives and tries to command the scene and make a big scene. I can see public safety but sometimes they go overboard.


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

I myself had an exact same situtation on an interstate. A two car crash where all parties were out (it was 99% property) and someone complained of back pain. All vehicles and my cruiser were in the BDL. It was raining but daylight. The ambulance arrived and parked in the BDL ahead of the crash. For some reason the EMT/FF's needed an extra set of hands to load 2 people. The engine arrives and stops dead, behind me, in the right travel lane. Again, its raining, its an interstate and on a curve. I ask, then ask again, and after being ignored, demand the truck be moved. When I was ignored a fourth time I informed the head FF if the truck didn't move I would tow it, lock him up for disorderly and in the interim, if anyone crashed as a result of his action I would find he and his dept. as the cause of the crash.

That finally got his attention. 

A week later, they did the same thing with a Sgt. 
He got into a debate with the Chief who envoked some NFFA SOP etc etc. I gave the Sgt the MassHwy regulations for traffic setups. He sent that to the Chief and last I heard they backed down.

However, some of the surrounding towns, don't do this. They ask, cooperate, and even when I have taken a lane for them, they don't use it. 

Go figure.


----------



## REILEYDOG (Nov 5, 2005)

It gets even better when all of the volunteer guys arrive half-in-the -bag in their 1982 F-150's with full light bars .


----------



## Andy0921 (Jan 12, 2006)

REILEYDOG said:


> It gets even better when all of the volunteer guys arrive half-in-the -bag in their 1982 F-150's with full light bars .


:L: :L: :L: :L: So true! Most of them are all good guys where I live though


----------



## Louie (Oct 15, 2002)

> USMCTrooper
> 
> A week later, they did the same thing with a Sgt.
> He got into a debate with the Chief who envoked some NFFA SOP etc etc. I gave the Sgt the MassHwy regulations for traffic setups. He sent that to the Chief and last I heard they backed down.


USMC - What do the MA Highway Regs say ???? We have had issues with our FD and I would like to give it to them also

Thanks


----------



## rocksy1826 (Nov 12, 2006)

...i gotta say? i would've argued moving the truck too. I've worked a good number of crashes on 93. We block the scene with our trucks to protect ourselves too. Standing on 93 at 2am is kinda scary. Especially when traffic is light enough that idiots are still going 80 mph by us.

were they left unprotected if the truck was moved?

...i admit, i get off on being able to make smokies do what i want when the call is more medical than anything

wasn't there, not picking a side. but i'm not working a scene where i'm likely to get hit by a car because there's nothing protecting me



Blueflu1 said:


> We have all been there. FD arrives and tries to command the scene and make a big scene. I can see public safety but sometimes they go overboard.


if a call is medical, EMS is supposed to be in charge.


----------



## Portable81 (Jun 17, 2004)

An interesting point to note... In the state of Connecticut, FD has command of any motor vehicle accident they are called to, by state law.


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

rocksy1826 said:


> ...i gotta say? i would've argued moving the truck too. I've worked a good number of crashes on 93. We block the scene with our trucks to protect ourselves too. Standing on 93 at 2am is kinda scary. Especially when traffic is light enough that idiots are still going 80 mph by us.
> 
> were they left unprotected if the truck was moved?
> 
> ...


You might be in charge of the patient, but you are not in charge of the scene when it pertains to public safety. Trust the cops and you won't get hurt. I seriously doubt anyone would make you move your rig if it would expose you or any other personnel to danger.

The argument being made is that fire dept. drops their equipment like it fell out of the sky. (Not all but some)


----------



## MM1799 (Sep 14, 2006)

rocksy1826 said:


> ...i gotta say? i would've argued moving the truck too. I've worked a good number of crashes on 93. We block the scene with our trucks to protect ourselves too. Standing on 93 at 2am is kinda scary. Especially when traffic is light enough that idiots are still going 80 mph by us.


We know what we are doing. If a state trooper tells you to do something on a state highway, I dont care if you have red flashing lights.. *MOVE IT*. Whenever I have motorists/FF move I follow the guidelines, keep traffic moving (as much as possible) and most importantly safety first. 
I really hope you wouldn't argue, because I promise you wont win. 


> were they left unprotected if the truck was moved?


I would find that surprising. I dont know of any police officer who isn't aware of everyone's safety at a scene. I would pay to see an EMT get into a shouting match with me on the side of the highway, at 2am. LOL, oh sorry.. you were serious.


----------



## rocksy1826 (Nov 12, 2006)

MM1799 said:


> I would find that surprising. I dont know of any police officer who isn't aware of everyone's safety at a scene. I would pay to see an EMT get into a shouting match with me on the side of the highway, at 2am. LOL, oh sorry.. you were serious.


i haven't had a cop tell me to do something i felt was dangerous, though i have experienced ambulance before cruiser practiced to the point where i wound up getting my ass kicked due to the hope EMS could handle it without PD making an appearence. I have faith in the police, but there are always exceptions to the general rule that they're highly competent and effective. bad apples and laziness happen in fd, ems and pd alike.

Just reading the story, trying to picture the scenario and commenting

and we know what we're doing too. you get hurt, i'm who you may end up with. have a little faith.

oh, and i'm a stubborn shit. If i disagree and have a valid point of what's up.... I'm going to point it out to you. Not everyone is right all the time. I'll just have professional courtesy and be polite about it.


----------



## MM1799 (Sep 14, 2006)

rocksy1826 said:


> oh, and i'm a stubborn shit. If i disagree and have a valid point of what's up.... I'm going to point it out to you. Not everyone is right all the time. I'll just have professional courtesy and be polite about it.


Very well. I thought you were insinuating you'd turn out to be like these New Jersey FF and end up getting arrested. We dont need FF/EMT's making our lives harder -- as you dont need PD's making your's harder. Bad apples, losers always make _everyone_ look bad. 

Not to start a fight or anything, but when it comes to rules/regulations and setups.. we are paid to be right. It's either right or wrong and unless you just didn't pay attention to anything at the academy or are a sheriff (oh, sorry.. again) then you are expected to be right.


----------



## rocksy1826 (Nov 12, 2006)

MM1799 said:


> Very well. I thought you were insinuating you'd turn out to be like these New Jersey FF and end up getting arrested. We dont need FF/EMT's making our lives harder -- as you dont need PD's making your's harder. Bad apples, losers always make _everyone_ look bad.


i may have a temper and a fiesty streak... but when i'm at work, i do not get into shouting matches with people i'm supposed to be working with. If I don't like something? i'll keep my mouth shut or ask you about it after the fact. If i don't like something because it's dangerous? I will bring it to your attention as politely as possible.

I have no interest with being at war with people that I need to help me on calls. I just am not going to bow out and shut up like some little bitch if i feel like my safety is at risk. Neither should anyone else.

and on a side note? i'm more likely to side with PD than FD any day. I find PD to be more useful and more rational when i really need it (for the most part). That being said? I still won't take crap from anyone on scene when it comes to my patient getting safe, effective and fast care.


----------



## NFAfan (May 10, 2006)

NPD S3 said:


> USMC - What do the MA Highway Regs say ???? We have had issues with our FD and I would like to give it to them also
> 
> Thanks


I'd like to see that reg too.


----------



## Inspector (Nov 13, 2006)

Locally, whenever F.D. dispatches an ambulance to an MVA (FD-MEDICS are same department in most towns here), they also dispatch a fire truck. This is for two purposes: 1. Stand-by for fire and/or liquid spills, 2.Three persons often needed for transports due to multiple patients and/or specific emergency care. They usually establish Incident Command on scenes and, according to new federal regs, all of us (COPS etc) are suppose to know this system (We're getting the 7 step Homeland Security Training now)...even though highway regs conflict. When I worked patrol I'd place my cruiser to protect the scene and felt very happy when a big firetruck,,with red flashing lights pulled in BEHIND it as it was a much bigger barrier than my cruiser. If it got hit I had paperwork...but we also had a cruiser. We've all had problems with volunteers and untrained personnel on scenes...but then that's why they are trying to establish universal standards and procedures. We need less squabbling and more communication and planning. Cops, FF, EMT's and MEDICS know their jobs and we have to work together to make sure we all can do them well and safely.


----------



## USMCTrooper (Oct 23, 2003)

They are not regs as in CMR's. Refer to your "Work Zone Safety" manual issued by MassHwy. In the chapter "Emergency Response Incidents" on pg-01 it shows the setup for incidents on shoulder/breakdown lane. No lanes are closed. This is MassHwy making these decisions for state roads based on federal Highway Administration's MUTCD. I don't know if it would apply to city streets.


----------



## SPINMASS (Jan 30, 2004)

I would rather be off the road and in the BDL, whether working as an EMT or PO. I want as minimal exposure to traffic as possible.


----------



## NFAfan (May 10, 2006)

SPINMASS said:


> I would rather be off the road and in the BDL, whether working as an EMT or PO. I want as minimal exposure to traffic as possible.


I'm sure everyone else wants minimum exposure also, and thats not how it usually works.
If I have to be on the highway, especially at night, I'd much rather have a fire truck (or two) than a car or a road flare between me and oncoming traffic.

As far as Mass Highway and their "setups" go, they are irrelavant at an accident scene. The scene is managed according to what conditions exist at the time and by the appropriate agency whether its PD, FD or EMS and if it means closing down a lane or two or the entire highway for operations to be done safely for responders, so be it. The quicker the scene is cleared, the quicker traffic can resume....but until then...responder's safety takes priority.


----------



## rocksy1826 (Nov 12, 2006)

NFAfan said:


> I'm sure everyone else wants minimum exposure also, and thats not how it usually works.
> If I have to be on the highway, especially at night, I'd much rather have a fire truck (or two) than a car or a road flare between me and oncoming traffic.
> 
> As far as Mass Highway and their "setups" go, they are irrelavant at an accident scene. The scene is managed according to what conditions exist at the time and by the appropriate agency whether its PD, FD or EMS and if it means closing down a lane or two or the entire highway for operations to be done safely for responders, so be it. The quicker the scene is cleared, the quicker traffic can resume....but until then...responder's safety takes priority.


this thread jinxed me and i broke my 10 day stretch of not having to stand on a busy highway for a call.

god i hate doing that. highligher yellow raincoat or not... it's just not cool


----------



## OutOfManyOne (Mar 2, 2006)

The latest thing that all the bucketheads are trying to claim at the scene is that they are the scene commanders and have authority. It's not an incident involving them, i tell them if it's a freaking fire or other buckethead duty it might be theirs. I hate it when they eradicate all my evidence at a crash scene.


----------



## phuzz01 (May 1, 2002)

If a fire chief wants to throw his weight around and tell you that it is his scene, there is an easy two step response to that scenario...

Step #1 = "Dispatch, I'll be clear. Apparently fire is going to be booking this crash." :mrgreen:

Step #2 = Go get a coffee.


----------



## firefighter39 (Apr 10, 2006)

527 CMR 1.03: continued

(8) Duties of the Head of the Fire Department. Whenever the maintenance, operation, or *use of any land, building, structure, material or other object,* or any part thereof, including vehicles used in the transport of hazardous materials *constitutes a fire or explosion hazard which is dangerous or unsafe, or a menace to the public safety* (*including, but not limited to*, fires, explosions, hazardous material incidents, *motor vehicle accidents*, structural collapses, mass casualty incidents and emergency extrication incidents) and the action to be taken to eliminate such dangerous or unsafe condition or conditions which create, or tend to create, the same is not specifically provided for in 527 CMR, and* unless otherwise prohibited by law*, ordinance, by‑law, regulation, *the head of the fire department is hereby authorized and empowered to take such action as may be necessary to abate such dangerous or unsafe condition or conditions (directing employees of other city or town departments and agencies)* and including the evacuation of buildings and/or the transport or hazardous materials, the speed, routes, amounts, and hours of transport through the city, town or district shall also be regulated.


----------

