[Warning: Video May be Disturbing to Some Viewers] Major Injury Head-on Collision on Highway 101 Near Cooks Valley
This post contains of video of the accident that may be disturbing to some viewers.
A head-on collision just occurred around 3:15 p.m. on August 9th just north of the Humboldt/Mendocino County line near the Patriot gas station in Cooks Valley.The accident involved a white Chevy Silverado pickup and a semi-truck, though photos from the scene indicate this is a box truck.
Scanner traffic indicates there are two people with moderate to major injuries and two people with minor injuries. Emergency personnel are on scene.
Please remember that this story is unfolding. Information is being reported as we gather it. However, some of the information coming from witnesses and initial official reports could be wrong. We will do our best to get the facts but, in the case that something is inaccurate, we will update with correct information as soon as we can.
Update 3:37 p.m.: An air ambulance is en route to the scene of the accident, now called the Renner IC.
The video from the scene was sent in by Cyndi Bushnell. Warning, the video may be disturbing to some viewers.
Update 4:38 p.m.: During an interview with Kmud News Director, Lauren Schmitt, CHP Public Information Officer, Jonathan Clevenger stated that an arrest has been made as a result of the head-on collision in Cooks Valley. Clevenger also stated that a minor was involved in the accident and the minor’s parent has been notified.
Clevenger did not clarify which vehicle was driven by the arrested individual.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Which copter? Looks like a CDF Huey.
Reach Air.
Nope . Cal fire.
Looks like C902 but it’s hard to read the Number
It’s C909, the CDF Huey confirmed via FlightRadar24 and visual-it just flew over redway headed north.
Thanks, I found the Cal Fire flight tracker and saw a helicopter moving in the vicinity, and it said C909, I just couldn’t confirm it…
C909…
It was a CDF helicopter.
Did both CDF and Reach respond? The copter in the video is definitely CDF.
It looks like the white pickup T-boned the box truck right in the left side. Pay attention out there!
It might save your life.
Terrible accident i hope everyone will be okay. Is there a limit to what can be posted ? Or what is considered to be graphic? Would you post images of victims? if photos/ videos was sent to you? is it legal to share or do the persons involved have a right to privacy? Nothing against the article Just curious when i see post like this.
What are you talking about?
Most of us appreciate getting the news (happy or sad) as soon as possible!
Agreed. And what’s with all the chatter about type of helicopter?
That was me, not this fellow…
What can I say?
I like helicopters and planes, especially when the come to the rescue…
Does that make me a “wingnut”?
“Sky Cranes”, “FireHawks”, “Hueys”, “Broncos”, “Dolphins”, “Eurocopters”…
What’s not to love about all those?
I know it was you, I was chatting with North.
But you see, North wasn’t chatting with me.
That’s all that I meant.
Doesn’t matter if North was chatting with you. You weren’t mentioned. Please stop.
Imposter!
As usual your reading comprehension is failing you..
He was having a conversation with NW.. He agreed with him, (not you)
and then made a comment about helicopters comment to NW. (again not directed at you)..
And here comes the excuses..
I suppose all the imaginary friends, would, of course, believe that, too.
There is safety in numbers.
No worries.
Comprehend that.
What’s your point?
Oh ye of masterful reading comprehension, maybe you need to reread it…
NW was talking about, “Most of us appreciate getting the news (happy or sad) as soon as possible!”
NW didn’t make a comment about helicopters, but I did…
Miguel asked about the helicopter type chatter.
That would be me, but he was associating with “Terrible accident” Guest.
I was included in the helicopter chatter.
So I said, to Miguel, not NW, “That was me, not this fellow…that said, “Terrible accident i hope everyone will be okay.” …
Can you not see where my reply was to Miguel, and not NW?
Look closer.
You just got a little flustered, that’s all.
It’s perfectly clear.
Guys, do you realize how many of your comments are each of you showing how vastly morally superior you are to each other>
We’re all muddling along here. Trying to find some truth, something that makes sense. Could you be a little more compassionate with each other? The comment section and maybe even the world would be a bit better if we weren’t trying to one up each other. You both have so much to offer and we’d all benefit if you would spend less time sneering and more time trying to provide info.
Yeah Guest..
(humor font)
And, thank you fox. He/she/they/it whatever, must be a ball to have at a party.
Was the accident in a public place?
First responders may not be allowed to post pictures of victims. Big stink over Kobe Bryant accident pictures, but other than that no restrictions as far as I know.
Like videotaping a cop murdering someone and giving it to a news organization to show…
You can’t identify any patients in the video. It’s mostly firefighters working on extricating another patient. I can tell there is a patient, but not who it is. So the reporting is within standards. They warned you not to look if it might bother you. Otherwise the accident happened. The tragedy is real whether or not RHBB reports it. There are online apps dedicated to kitten and puppies for when reality is difficult.
I’ll chime in here with my individual thoughts, though I think they align closely with Kym’s. She has been met with criticism on multiple occasions about this very topic. Not everyone will see eye to eye. Most take for granted that they have information at their fingertips, I know that I do.
For me, I weigh the benefit in informing the public vs. people’s privacy. There are clear legal guidelines about what we can and cannot photograph or disclose, but my own code comes to play in this. I often receive information or photos that I choose not to use. Sometimes I have to bounce that information off fellow reporters to make sure I’m not being biased or timid in my reporting approach. It is a line we walk daily.
If there had been a person receiving CPR, I would not have posted this. However, other times, I think showing horrific crimes/violence/accidents delivers information in a way that the written word cannot, and at times, that needs to be shared.
If someone’s child drowned in a local river, I’d would not post a photo of that, however, the photos of the drowned Syrian child needed to be shown so that people could understand the loss and devastation of the Syrian people fleeing their country. Without those images, I would not have fully grasped the situation, and that situation needed to be shared.
The desperation of people jumping to their deaths from the towers. Those are horrific yet necessary images so we can grasp the reality of a situation. Many may not want to grasp the horrifying reality, so there are disclaimers but like someone else said, the situation remains horrifying whether it is reported or not.
In this situation, the damage to the vehicle reminds people of the dangers on our roadways without identifying the people involved. The fatal accident along Highway 101 involving the motorcyclists was heavily criticized, and yet when my son asks to get a street-legal motorcycle, I see the picture of the die on the roadway, scattered with bike parts. It’s not the words I recall, but the image of how dangerous the roadways can be for those on two wheels and how life can tragically change in the blink of an eye.
The recent fire in Salmon Creek (aside from the fact that it was incredibly close to a dear friend) was relatively minor in comparison to the fires and accidents I hear/report about daily. Yet Julian’s photos really brought home the devastation of the fire and the bravery of the fire crews. Without those pictures, in my head it would have been “fully engulfed two-story home, no injuries, and the fire was contained” instead of the loss I feel for the homeowner and the gratitude I have for the fire personnel against that wall of flames.
Photos help us empathize, they can trigger grief or anger, moments of happiness and joy. That is a powerful tool that I hope to wield appropriately as I report.
Well said Ms Music..
🤔🧐, I concur…💯🙂😅😂🤣😁
🤔🧐Whew! Mackeroly!
Somebody just got chewed out, big time!
I’m glad it wasn’t me!
(Sorry to disappoint you all)…
You just chewed out a different “Guest”.
That heat was meant for me…
(Unfortunate fellow.)
Forgive me if I find it amusing….🤷♂️😁
(I didn’t think that the images were graphic, at all…nor did I question them in any way)…
I will say that sometimes pictures can be too revealing, and can damage the reputation of otherwise innocent individuals, if exposed prematurely, but that only might happen very, very, rarely…
Kym does an outstanding and exemplary job. Unmatched, not even close. So there.
🤔🧐Bunch of jackals out there.😅😂🤣
Looks like I dodged a few bullets…
Barely…
Right, we believe that….
Adding all the Emoji’s now make this even more laughable.
🤔🧐”We”…???
How could you possibly vouch for what “We” believe?
You can’t honestly really claim to know
or vouch for what anyone believes, besides just little old you, can you?
Sad dude, simply sad…
That’s not an answer from any of you.
“You” can’t answer it?
That’s what “I” thought…
(See how that works?)
(Notice that “I” didn’t say, “That’s what “WE” thought”?)
And if you really believe that it was I that made the comment that began with, “Terrible accident”…, you should get that checked…
Send Kym an email, and maybe she will confirm it for you.
By suggesting that I have added the emojis as part of some kind of ruse, you are only embarrassing yourself.
That, and using “WE” in the singular first person, and the inability to see neither as errors, is what is actually sad.
But I’m sure you won’t believe that, either.
Comprehend it, if you can.
nosism noun
nos·ism | \ ˈnōˌsizəm, ˈnäˌ- \
plural -s
Definition of nosism
1archaic : the conceit or pride of a group of persons
2archaic : the practice of using we in giving one’s opinions
“All of which is to say that speaking in the third person is almost never an honest referendum of self-awareness. And because of it, we’re all being gaslit.”
First used attributed to King Henry II…
“…what began as an indication of self-appointed ties to divinity (a more sincere, if still utterly bullshit usage)…”
That’s makes it really ironic, in this case…
https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/the-people-using-we-when-they-really-mean-i-are-just-gutless
“I’m not saying they necessarily realize they’re being evasive, but it’s always going to be easier to diffuse personal responsibility — because it always starts at the top — by diluting the first person with the word “we”.”
“In other words, what began as an indication of self-appointed ties to divinity (a more sincere, if still utterly bullshit usage) has now transformed into a mechanism to help those seeking forgiveness to appear more relatable and more “a part of our team.”
“I should also note that in the same HBR article, the writer suggests that using “we” when you really mean “I” is actually a positive way to communicate with people who are clearly at a subordinate level, arguing that it could help “shift your perspective from self-focused to others-focused, making you more aware of other’s needs.” ”
“Idisagree — only a coward groups himself together with some imaginary self-serving faction to saturate, [satiate], their personal guilt. I’m not alone: James Walpole, a writer for the Foundation for Economic Education, argues that saying “we” is a poor substitute for both teamwork and personal responsibility, for the same reason. “When ‘we’ should be acting, you individually don’t have to bear the responsibility,” writes Walpole. His advice, then, for communicating with your subordinates, constituents or team, is to change the substance of your words, rather than manipulate your pronouns. “If you can’t communicate team spirit without using ‘we,’ then you have a problem,” he explains. “You shouldn’t have to change the language to manipulate reality. Redeem the language of ‘I’ and ‘you’ by changing your tone, intent and actions in the important work of communicating with your team and colleagues.” “
“Even the Quora community has noticed the proliferation of “we” amongst its users. “Why do so many people on Quora say ‘we’ instead of ‘I’?” asks one, to which another posits that it helps “pass the buck to unknown ‘we’ who can’t be held responsible.”
To that end, New York Times writer Ben Zimmer argues that the inclusive “we” is intended to establish “a bond of empathy or common understanding between the speaker and the receiver of a message,” but that it’s not an effective approach. “Writers rely on it to establish rapport with readers, and teachers with students (‘as we shall see’),” he writes. “But this is not always a welcome rhetorical move, especially when it comes across as pedantic or condescending.”
“All of which is to say that speaking in the third person is almost never an honest referendum of self-awareness. And because of it, we’re all being gaslit.”
So what Guest is this? No emoji’s?
I was thinking DID but the personalities act and speak in the same manner..
Why prolong the fantasy?
Send that email, now…
Then you will have the proof that you are wrong.
The truth shall set you free…
If you choose to believe it.
Is that what you are afraid of?
Don’t judge everyone by yourself.
I don’t refer to myself as “we”.
Not in any way.
You seem to be very familiar with it though.
It’s funny, you seemed to be able to vouch for whether LaFever was using an insult or not, as a matter of fact, as well, as if you were him, and not you…
You do know that is quite impossible, don’t you?
Unless, of course you are a mind reader…
👁️🔮🧠
Is that it?
I was thinking he’s more like this:
Nice.
Would that be a “royal” “we”, and “editorial” “we”, combined, mashup type “we”?
“Inclusive” to some, aaand,”exclusive”, to others?
As in “super special” ?
There is no right to prvacy in public. Photography of anything visible in public is not illegal.
Went past there a bit earlier. People are driving safe through there generally but are hauling butt north from Healdsburg up – autobahn {75 mph avg speed). Lots of new fast cars meant for speed and highway stretches built for it. Cannot say I blame them. More mad max charger and Yukon solitary but coordinated pods of Orca California State highway patrolmen than ever. Have not witnessed that in years since seeing the wolf packs of Washington State Troopers with mountie hats on I-5 taking down whole groups of 5 to 10 cars at once. Be careful out there and super aware.
Drove round trip to Wisconsin and back recently and it was really interesting to see the differences in driving habits from state to state. A lot of 80mph speed limits, including South Dakota where there’s not even a lower limit on trailers so we saw triple-trailer UPS trucks and minivans towing giant pontoon boats just bouncing and undulating all over the freeway at what seemed like absolutely insane speeds. Two lane highways in parts of Montana don’t even have speed limits posted unless you’re passing through a town. We crossed through a few entire states without ever seeing a single cop. Then there was Idaho, where we probably saw more cops than the rest of the entire trip combined in the 60 or so miles it took to get across the panhandle.
Looks like a DUI with her entire family in the car as passengers. Yikes!
https://lostcoastoutpost.com/2022/aug/10/chp-driver-arrested-dui-following-yesterdays/