 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / April 2005Tire for Hire
Now, let me see if I've got this straight. As a regular citizen motorist, if I get caught speeding I'll be required to pay a ticket. If I get caught speeding over a pedestrian to cause a fatality, I'll face additional costly citations and jail time. As a government employee behind the wheel, I'm cleared to make street pizza out of anyone in my way by ignoring speed limits. No penalty whatsoever will be imposed on me for breaking traffic laws to kill with my government vehicle. Did I get you right on that? Sincerely, Timothy "Humvee" McVeigh PS Are applications for the specific-individual pick-off incentives being accepted at this time? William Dreyer, 28, of Baden, PA, was doing 53 in a 35 mph zone when he mowed down Justin Zankel, a twelve-year-old boy on the way to school. Dreyer got no ticket for speeding, no citation for slamming into a kid, not even a stern word. Dreyer is a government employee who was driving an official vehicle in the incident. http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/4311146/detail.html > Now, let me see if I've got this straight. > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > word. Dreyer is a government employee who > was driving an official vehicle in the incident. Quit simplifying this sh.t for your own pedantic purposes. The registration of the vehicle had nothing to do with the fact circumstances, which are noted in the actual story. The kid's insurer should be paying to repair the vehicle damage, is more like it. > Now, let me see if I've got this straight. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > whatsoever will be imposed on me for breaking > traffic laws to kill with my government vehicle. http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/4311146/detail.html A coroner's inquest, highly unusual for Beaver County, was held Wednesday to examine the death of an Ambridge Junior High student. Justin Zankel, 12, of Baden, was struck by a car while crossing a street to his bus stop early on the morning of Jan. 27. He died the next day at Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh. Police said Marine recruiter William Dreyer, 27, was driving the vehicle, which had a government license plate. Zankel was rushing across the intersection to avoid an oncoming van when Dreyer's car struck him from the opposite direction, police said. After hearing evidence at the inquest, a coroner's jury felt that the death was an accident and recommended no criminal charges. The final decision on whether to prosecute rests with the district attorney. ------------- So to put it simply, it was investigated and found to be an accident, just as it would have been had a 'regular citizen motorist' been driving. Perhaps if you read the articles you link to before you post, rather than just race off into an ideological rant, you wouldn't look like such a fool? But I thought if you had an "accident" while speeding you would still get a manslaughter charge. > > Now, let me see if I've got this straight. > > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > Perhaps if you read the articles you link to before you post, rather than > just race off into an ideological rant, you wouldn't look like such a fool? > But I thought if you had an "accident" while speeding you would still get a > manslaughter charge. Evidently, you thought wrong. > But I thought if you had an "accident" while speeding you would still get > a > manslaughter charge. Only if the coroners court finds grounds for further investigation and the prosecuting authorities fell that they have a winnable case. Bottom line is if someone runs out in front of you there's not much you can do about it. Now excessive speed MIGHT be cause for prosecution but only if it can be demonstrated that you could have avoided hitting the victim had you been traveling more slowly. I imagine the driver feels terrible anyway. I once had a case where someone opened up a shop doorway and a 5 years old child ran straight into the road in front of me. Fortunately I had just pulled away from a red light and was moving at only 10mph or so. I just to say hit the kid but she was only bruised. I couldnt stop shaking for an hour though and had to leave the car and calm down before I could drive it again. Keith > But I thought if you had an "accident" while speeding you would still get a > manslaughter charge. That's a very misplaced assumption. If you search for a few more articles on the incident, you will see that the cop testified that he did not think travelling at the speed limit would have prevented the accident, and that some of the other kids walking with the victim saw the approaching car and yelled out warnings that were ignored. >> But I thought if you had an "accident" while speeding you would still get > a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > prevented the accident, and that some of the other kids walking with the > victim saw the approaching car and yelled out warnings that were ignored. I see a quote that says the car was going 53 in a 35 speed limit zone - I suppose that timing had nothing to do with it. How about this: The kid saw the car coming, assumed (bad thing!) that it was going at the 35 limit, and bolted. If the car was going 35 then it would not have gotten there when the kid was there. Going at the illegal 53 mph caused the car to arrive at the scene much sooner, thus killing the child. Sad day... In Ohio, if you are travelling 16 mph or more over the posted speed limit, you can be charged with reckless operation in addition to speeding. > I see a quote that says the car was going 53 in a 35 speed limit zone - I suppose that timing had nothing to do with it. > How about this: The kid saw the car coming, assumed (bad thing!) that it was going at the 35 limit, and bolted. If the > car was going 35 then it would not have gotten there when the kid was there. Going at the illegal 53 mph caused the car > to arrive at the scene much sooner, thus killing the child. > In Ohio, if you are travelling 16 mph or more over the posted speed > limit, you can be charged with reckless operation in addition to speeding. What section of the Ohio Revised Code says that? I came up dry on the Anderson's web site. Fred F. > > In Ohio, if you are travelling 16 mph or more over the posted speed > > limit, you can be charged with reckless operation in addition to > speeding. > > What section of the Ohio Revised Code says that? I came up dry on the > Anderson's web site. Hell, In Texas, I've had a ticket for 154 in a 55 and all they did was write me a ticket... Worked out to be $200 + court costs... About $234, IIRC... I think he either clocked me while I was still winding up or when I was slowing down for a curve... I couldn't tell you. That's what a cop told me as he was writing a ticket for me doing 51 in a 35 zone. >>In Ohio, if you are travelling 16 mph or more over the posted speed >>limit, you can be charged with reckless operation in addition to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Fred F. > I see a quote that says the car was going 53 in a 35 speed limit zone - I suppose that timing had nothing to do with it. > How about this: The kid saw the car coming, assumed (bad thing!) that it was going at the 35 limit, and bolted. If the > car was going 35 then it would not have gotten there when the kid was there. Going at the illegal 53 mph caused the car > to arrive at the scene much sooner, thus killing the child. If he saw it coming, he made an incorrect assessment of it's speed - the other kids made the correct determination and tried to warn him. Your theory sounds like someone who makes a left turn in front of oncoming traffic, resulting in a collision, and then claims the other car was speeding as it approached the intersection. Well, if you knew it was speeding, why did you turn in front of it? Nothing in the articles says he won;t get charged with another, lesser offence. The prosecutor is not bound by the jury's finding, and could even lay the originally contemplated charge. it seems clear the guy should get a speeding conviction, at least, on the evidence. Who here hasn't gone 10 miles over the limit in a school, or playground zone? And on those times when you did, if a kid popped out from behind a parked car and you had no chance to stop, even if travelling at the posted speed, would you expect to be charged and convicted of vehicular homicide, or whatever, based on the speed factor alone? > > I see a quote that says the car was going 53 in a 35 speed limit zone - I > suppose that timing had nothing to do with it. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > speed, would you expect to be charged and convicted of vehicular homicide, > or whatever, based on the speed factor alone? Suspect a civil suit will be filed and if he was doing 53 in a 35 it certainly won't help his defense. > Suspect a civil suit will be filed and if he was doing 53 in a 35 it > certainly won't help his defense. There's always a civil suit. And I agree that the speed will almost certainly mean there is some liability. However, that does not automatically equate to criminal conduct. >Suspect a civil suit will be filed and if he was doing 53 in a 35 it >certainly won't help his defense. I read the original URL, and the two links from it, and didn't see how a speed of 53 was determined. Anyone know how 53 was determined?  SignatureBill Funk Change "g" to "a" A state investigator analysed the car's "black box" data. <SNIP> > I see a quote that says the car was going 53 in a 35 speed limit zone - I suppose that timing had nothing to do with it. > How about this: The kid saw the car coming, assumed (bad thing!) that it was going at the 35 limit, and bolted. If the > car was going 35 then it would not have gotten there when the kid was there. Going at the illegal 53 mph caused the car > to arrive at the scene much sooner, thus killing the child. > > Sad day... Based on research at the local university using VR to simulate road crossing... (I was only watching and helping a fellow grad student).. One might tend to agree...you also have to consider the individual's attitude to risk... With the same "time to collision" people were more likely to have an accident when crossing (half) the road (That's due to the cable for the VR helmet only allowing about 20 feet of recorded movement) when the vehicle was close, or further away.. fewer accidents occurred with the vehicle at a medium distance ... sorry, can't remember the distances Meaning.. Close... The person Watches the vehicle for a short period, identifies that it is traveling "slowly" and attempts to cross the road quickly. Medium. The vehicle is far enough away that they cross at a brisk speed. Distant. The vehicle is sufficiently far away that they cross at a "normal" speed... (Crossing speed reduces the further away the vehicle is when you start crossing...) The time to collision was calibrated to the individual crossing speed (normal and fast... note that in the virtual environment participants tended to go faster than the recorded fast crossing rate). Distance refers to how far away the vehicle is when each trial starts. Note that, as time to collision is constant, the further away the vehicle, the faster it has to be traveling... Conclusion.. Road crossing decisions tend to be made on distance and not speed -- we typically don't watch the vehicle long enough to judge speed based on looming rate... note that participants did speed up as the vehicle approached.. but that is because they are getting more information on potential time to collision. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.