Two Fairfield County dispatchers reprimanded for mishandling 91...

where do they find these dispatchers

There's more to this then what they are telling us. In this town, where I live they'll send 2.5 million dollar fire truck to car accident outside the city limits to cut the the battery cables! The training has never been established for these operators and they often forget why people dial 911. I am thankful for "On-Star" in my vehicles as it monitors and analysis the situation and broadcasts the problem.

i thought it was always customary to get all the information on all call in s?

took a dispatchers class at columbus state and geting All the information on call ins what ever the situation? misstakes happen but you think THE right training could help in being a disspatcher

Kwaljalein-Marysville wrote:

There's more to this then what they are telling us. In this town, where I live they'll send 2.5 million dollar fire truck to car accident outside the city limits to cut the the battery cables! The training has never been established for these operators and they often forget why people dial 911. I am thankful for "On-Star" in my vehicles as it monitors and analysis the situation and broadcasts the problem.

Just curious who do you think on-star calls if you have an accident? Battery cables must be cut because the batteries may and do explode if they short out. Firefighters are even trained to approach a vehical at an angle in case this happens. I have seen vidoes of this happening and harming people. Some cities do have mutual aid agreements which means if one department is already on a call another department will help out. This helps keep everyone as safe as possible. Maybe you should educate yourself a little.

the driver stated she thought she hit a deer or person and there was a vehicle close by and the sheriff's department doesn't send anyone? instead a patrolman finds the deceased lady while stopping just to check on a diabled vehicle. unacceptable

wtf wrote:

the driver stated she thought she hit a deer or person and there was a vehicle close by and the sheriff's department doesn't send anyone? instead a patrolman finds the deceased lady while stopping just to check on a diabled vehicle. unacceptable

Until I hear or read the transcript of the call I will reserve judgement. We all know that the news doesn't always get the story right the first time. I find it hard to believe that if the caller said that they might have hit a person that the dispathcer would just ignore that. If it just sounds wrong it probably is.

your taxes at work!

were they busy handling more important calls???

wtf wrote:

the driver stated she thought she hit a deer or person and there was a vehicle close by and the sheriff's department doesn't send anyone? instead a patrolman finds the deceased lady while stopping just to check on a diabled vehicle. unacceptable

I believe it said that she went home and told her husband that she thought she hit a deer or a person, he went and looked, finding only a car. He then called 911. We don't know what he said to the dispatchers.

I've been reading these stupid comments from the dispatch readers for a few years now,(I still don't know why), and it never fails to amaze me how people think they know so much about everything, when they don't know squat! For all you know this dispatcher walked a mother through giving CPR to a choking infant, or kept someone trapped in a fire calm enough to escape. Just stick your stupid opinions where the sun don't shine until you do what she does. Dispatching school at Columbus State??? Yeah that makes you an expert! Read my heading!

Please tell me who in Central Ohio employs the use of a $2.5 Million piece of fire apparatus?!? I have never heard of such a thing, unless it is made of gold and carries champagne in its tank to supress fires...

I'd like to know what the husband told the dispatchers
It seems like you wouldn't call 911 to report that you thought your wife might have hit a deer, but you checked out the scene and didn't see anything. If he did say that, of course there wouldn't been much of a sense of urgency. Who would feel a sense of urgency over a hit deer that probably either didn't exist or had hopped off into the woods to die?
It seems like you would know whether you hit a deer or a person, or would at least stop to find out. Going home to get your husband to go back to a crash scene doesn't seem right to me. I know it was dark and she's an older lady, but geesh, stop and see what you've hit so you'll know what to say when you go for help.(I'm not saying this accident was her fault.)
It also sounds odd that he checked out the scene and didn't see anything. I wonder if he did see the victim, but tried to downplay it when he talked to the dispatchers, thinking it might help out his wife in some way. Or maybe he didn't see the victim, and told dispatchers he was sure it was just a deer, because that's what he was hoping. I mean, who really expects their wife to hit a person with a car on any given day?
I guess there are a million scenarios of what could have been, but the whole thing seems pretty odd.

I heard the 911 call. I got the clear impression that they knew she likely hit a person but were hopefull that it was a deer. Once a caller says they may have hit a deer or a person, an officer should be dispatched immediately. They are supposed to error on the side of caution. The dispatchers were clearly negligent and the county has a lawsuit coming to them.

The magic words; negligent & lawsuit!

Jonathan S wrote:

I heard the 911 call. I got the clear impression that they knew she likely hit a person but were hopefull that it was a deer. Once a caller says they may have hit a deer or a person, an officer should be dispatched immediately. They are supposed to error on the side of caution. The dispatchers were clearly negligent and the county has a lawsuit coming to them.

How did you get to hear a recording of the call?

concerned64 wrote:

<quoted text>
How did you get to hear a recording of the call?

Channel 4 or 6 last night, can't remember which one.

Sheer lack of professional conduct. Fire them.

Jonathan S wrote:

<quoted text>
Channel 4 or 6 last night, can't remember which one.

Thanks