Early Friday, a high-speed police chase ended in a crash after a driver evaded officers and recklessy navigated through a construction zone, causing workers to flee. The chase began around 2:20 a.m. on St John’s Street when officers spotted a damaged white Toyota Corolla that refused to stop. The driver sped onto Cross Street, running eight stop signs at high speeds, then entered an active construction zone, forcing workers to evacuate. The pursuit concluded when the vehicle hit two parked cars; the driver was arrested. No injuries occurred. The suspect faces charges including fleeing, reckless driving, and endangering safety.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
I’m being honest, every time 95% of the times when I read one of these news articles, I ask questions more than more how I get answers.
There must be a reason he chose to try and evade the cops, atleast that should have been stated, he didn’t just try to drive away just like that.
These police reports are like 14 days, them 2 weak.
Don’t come at me for the spelling of the word “Weak”.
Really hope the court deals with him harshly. This could have ended disastrously. Thank God it didn’t.
What else you expect? ANR Is a site that we all come to read story telling that have no jokes and ends with the feeling that it was a riddle
WHAT THE HELL…! …SOM-TING-WONG…? …STARVED FOR CREDIBILITY…?
…OFFICERS SPOTTED DAMAGED WHITE TOYOTA: …REFUSED TO STOP…?
***
NOT SURE: of
(a) ‘…THE SOURCE: or
(b) …WRITER OF THIS NEWS STORY.’
***
IF IT CAN BE SHOWN WHERE ‘…TWO WRONGS,’ EQUALS: .ONE RIGHT,’ THEN THERE SHALL BE NO NEED FOR ARGUMENTS.
***
ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION:
THERE SHALL BE NO REASON NOT TO’… CAUSE DISCIPLINARY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED, FOLLOWING THE CONDUCT OF ‘…ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION.’
***
PROFESSIONAL OBSERVATIONS:
***
NOW:
SINCE THE NEWS STORY SPOKE NOT: to
(a) ‘…POLICE GIVING MOTORIST ‘…LAWFUL DIRECTIONS TO STOP:’ and
(b) …FLEEING MOTORIST ‘…FAILED’ TO COMPLY,’ THIS NEWS STORY: seems
(c) ‘…STARVED FOR CREDIBILITY.’
***
GIVEN THESE REVELATIONS, PROFESSIONALLY SPEAKING: both
‘ …DAREDEVILS: namely
(i) ‘…FLEEING DRIVER: and
(ii) …POLICE PURSUING DRIVER:’ appeared as
***
(a) …EQUALLY DANGEROUS: and as
(b) …EQUALLY RECKLESS:’ NOT ONLY AS
(i) ‘…DAREDEVILS: but also
(ii) …IN ENDANGERING THE LIVES OF BOTH MOTORISTS AND PEDESTRIANS.’
***
DISCRETE AND SAFER WAYS:
THERE MAY HAVE BEEN MORE ‘…DISCRETE AND SAFER WAYS; IN DEALING WITH THE SITUATION.
***
MOTORISTS AND POLICE DRIVERS: shall both
DRIVE SAFELY: and
(a) ‘…OBSERVE: and
(b) …COMPLY WITH ALL TRAFFIC SIGNS:
(i) …APPROPRIATELY ERECTED ON ROADWAYS: and/or
***
(ii) …LAWFULLY PAINTED ON ROAD SURFACES.
***
WHAT THE HELL…!
***
Lol I like that….. 14 days police – dem WEAK🤣🤣
But seriously these inaccurate articles are ridiculous
Why did the police attempted to stop the driver of said vehicle in the first instance. Were they in the by e act of committing a crime, or under suspicion of a crime. What’s the name of the the alleged criminal.
said driver