DashCam owner offers video evidence to clear up what happened, but who was at fault?

[Street Guardian USA]

DashCam owner offers video evidence to clear up what happened, but who was at fault in the video here? 100% blame or shared?

The story:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Dashcam/comments/3whjap/stopped_the_wrong_person_from_getting_the_ticket/

 

[Rajagra]

Unless I'm missing one of those crazy US laws (like right turn on red) then the person who turned into someone else's path clearly did wrong.
The one driving through amber? Certainly not great driving, but much less at fault than the person turning.

 

[kandrey89]

The situation could be hazy if the turn guy is allowed to turn on green, which means he is completing the turn on yellow just like the other guy who is running yellow.
I don't remember if it's legal or not to enter into an intersection while green, without being able to complete the turn. If it's illegal, then the turn guy is at fault because he entered the intersection on a yellow, and hit a car that was passing the intersection on a yellow after that car entered the point of no return.

 

[Dee_82]

Seems like the guy entered that junction at some fair speed, I don't know how the laws work where ever this one was from but if I were the driver heading towards any junction, especially if I ran a yellow, id have slowed down, if he sped up to make the yellow its understandable that the driver turning might miss judge the speed. both at fault and avoidable.

 

[MiiHere]

I'm curious what the speed limit is and without the full video I can't count the yellow light.

The straight car entered the box on yellow and assuming they were not speeding could have made it across.

It is illegal to get yourself stuck in the intersection, it's 2 different tickets for running a red and getting stuck after entering on a green. (Though I can't speak for every state.)

That said, insurance doesn't like to pay out so each will blame each other.

 

[erkme73]

I vote for 100% blame to left-turner. Whether the guy going straight was speeding or not is immaterial (at least that's the way a FL trooper explained it to me after a wreck). The left-turner failed to yield. Anytime someone is crossing lanes of traffic that have the right-of-way, the responsibility to ensure a clear path remains with them.

 

[SawMaster]

Two ways to look at this. First is that the left-turner was in the intersection first so they should have had right-of way if the other car had stopped as they likely should have been able to. But you're never allowed to turn across the path of oncoming traffic. In a 'fault' State the turner gets burned as they should be. In a 'no fault' State they both have a share of the blame in this crash; I'm not so sure that should be that way. Neither driver did the right thing here.

Given the option I'd fault the crash for the turner and ticket the other for running a red light because they should have stopped on the yellow.

Phil

 

[erkme73]

I agree with your point, Phil, except for the last sentence. The driver going straight didn't run the light. His car was completely past the stop line before the light turned red (and technically only the front wheels need to cross on yellow to be considered not red). In hindsight, he probably should/could have stopped. But from a technical standpoint, he had no obligation to stop, and there is no way this guy would be convicted for running a red light if he has the video to take to court.

 

[MiiHere]

I agree with your point, Phil, except for the last sentence. The driver going straight didn't run the light. His car was completely past the stop line before the light turned red (and technically only the front wheels need to cross on yellow to be considered not red). In hindsight, he probably should/could have stopped. But from a technical standpoint, he had no obligation to stop, and there is no way this guy would be convicted for running a red light if he has the video to take to court.

I could be wrong as I don't stay up to date on laws, but this would depend on the sate laws and weather the yellow is permissive or restrictive. I know Oregon is (was?) restrictive and you must be able to clear the intersection before the red. I believe a few other states have the same laws.

 

[erkme73]

I could be wrong as I don't stay up to date on laws, but this would depend on the sate laws and weather the yellow is permissive or restrictive. I know Oregon is (was?) restrictive and you must be able to clear the intersection before the red. I believe a few other states have the same laws.

That's interesting, and warrants further research. I would have a hard time with a statute that makes yellow restrictive. In essence it would make yellow lights comparable to red lights - in which case why even have them. The idea is to give drivers a narrow window of warning to either clear or avoid the intersection. If everyone treated a yellow as a red, it would cause its own fair share of panic stops/accidents.

ETA: Here's Oregon's restrictive yellow statute as of 2014:

State of Oregon Vehicle Code ORS 811.260(4):
"A driver facing a steady circular yellow signal light is thereby warned that the related right-of-way is being terminated and that a red or flashing red light will be shown immediately. A driver facing the light shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, shall stop before entering the marked crosswalk on the near side of the intersection, or if there is no marked crosswalk, then before entering the intersection. If a driver cannot stop in safety, the driver may drive cautiously through the intersection."

Even with this 'restrictive' language, it seems to still be very subjective. What defines "stop in safety"? Is that in feet per second, no skidding? Groceries shooting to the dashboard? I just think this kind of wording is too ambiguous to be used to convict someone.

 

[MiiHere]

I learned to drive in Oregon and I can tell you drivers don't look at it as a red light. It's mainly seen as intended "slow down and stop." Obviously if you don't have time then you must proceed or when there is fresh rain it is best to as well - this decision is left up to the driver and there are times they decide wrong, but thankfully most lights have a seconds delay in turning green and cops ticket for those things.

 

[kamkar]

I would like to see for how much longer the light had been yellow/amber, looks like the guy had plenty of time to stop, but instead like so many ( here at least ) he opted to floor it, and by dooing that morally fingering ( with both hands ) the guy waiting to make his left turn.
It change to red even before they crash, so i assume the oncomming guy turning left was okay to assume the oncomming guy would stop.
Traffic would break down or change into even more Mad Max scenario if all motorists have to take those that do not follow the rules into account before they make a move.
Allmost every drive i have the chance to test this scenario, if i had another car at the ready i would try it out, at least 1 time.
As it is now i just honk at the ppl and display the length of my middle finger, or videotape the idiots and put them om youtube, or both

 

[erkme73]

I would like to see for how much longer the light had been yellow/amber, looks like the guy had plenty of time to stop, but instead like so many ( here at least ) he opted to floor it, and by dooing that morally fingering ( with both hands ) the guy waiting to make his left turn.
It change to red even before they crash, so i assume the oncomming guy turning left was okay to assume the oncomming guy would stop.
Traffic would break down or change into even more Mad Max scenario if all motorists have to take those that do not follow the rules into account before they make a move.
Allmost every drive i have the chance to test this scenario, if i had another car at the ready i would try it out, at least 1 time.
As it is now i just honk at the ppl and display the length of my middle finger, or videotape the idiots and put them om youtube, or both

You are making a very big presumption that the guy floored it. He hit his brakes hard before even entering the intersection - he still managed to completely enter the box before it turned red. So he was attentive - just not anticipating that the left-turner would be foolish enough to jump in front of him.

If the left turner got caught in the intersection after it turned red, he would have been perfectly legal to exit the intersection after all directions turned red and traffic cleared. There was NO reason for the left turner to go when he did.

 

[Gibson99]

I was taught not to even enter the intersection on a left turn yield situation unless you can safely complete the turn. That may be the law in Texas but I'm not sure.

 

[Dee_82]

The driver made no attempt to slow down for the light, what we don't know is what happened before, I find using round abouts a good way to explain these things, you give way to the right (uk) so you pull up to a roundabout and if a car is on the roundabout to your right you let them pass, of your their first you go. straight forward yes?

right, now add a bit of speed to things, you get to the round about first, but you see a car who is clearly not going to slow down approaching to the right, you have the legal right of way and could go, but they are coming from the right so also have the right of way in their eyes, if you go and you crash you should have anticipated and not gone, equally they should have slowed down. thatts why I said they both are to blame, any intersection of traffic should be approached cautiously and you should be ready to stop, failing to do that as in the case of this clip will lead to an accident. its all to easy to say that person was to blame but as with many of these things its not black and white

 

[Rajagra]

The way I think about roundabouts is that you can enter them provided you do not impede the progress of someone coming from your right. (UK)
Highway code wording is "give priority to traffic approaching from your right." Which amounts to the same thing - if there is a potential conflict you yield. Whether they are already on the roundabout or not doesn't matter.
Put simply, only pull out if it is safe!

This is a usefully flexible rule. You can pull out in front of someone - as long as it doesn't affect them.

And I think this principle applies universally. If you are moving into someones else's path then it's 100% your responsibility to ensure there is no danger or inconvenience caused.
Placing any burden of responsibility on the person being obstructed is an absurdity - it gives free reign to idiots to behave as dangerously as they please and still shift blame onto the victims of their stupidity.

Failing to correct someone else's mistake cannot be equated to making the mistake in the first place.

 

[Module 79L]

The way I think about roundabouts is that you can enter them provided you do not impede the progress of someone coming from your right. (UK)
Highway code wording is "give priority to traffic approaching from your right." Which amounts to the same thing - if there is a potential conflict you yield. Whether they are already on the roundabout or not doesn't matter.

Funny, I only found that out recently. I always thought you'd have to give priority to traffic already inside the roundabouts like in most, if not the rest, of the European countries, not to traffic coming from the right that didn't even was inside the roundabouts.

 

[country_hick]

If the paint of your front bumper is past the white line by .001" when the light turns red you did not run the red light.

If you did not run a red light and someone turns in front of you the person turning causes the accident.

In this video the car going straight was clearly inside the intersection on yellow. Unless speed was a legal issue the person turning is at fault.

 

[MiiHere]

That's interesting, and warrants further research. I would have a hard time with a statute that makes yellow restrictive. In essence it would make yellow lights comparable to red lights - in which case why even have them. The idea is to give drivers a narrow window of warning to either clear or avoid the intersection. If everyone treated a yellow as a red, it would cause its own fair share of panic stops/accidents.

ETA: Here's Oregon's restrictive yellow statute as of 2014:


Even with this 'restrictive' language, it seems to still be very subjective. What defines "stop in safety"? Is that in feet per second, no skidding? Groceries shooting to the dashboard? I just think this kind of wording is too ambiguous to be used to convict someone.

It seems pretty straight forward to me. The goal is to stop, not speed up. Cops are pretty understanding, except if you speed up and it's noticeable you'll more than likely be cited.

I've made the choice to go a couple times and been pulled over. I just explained that I'd do it the same if I had a redo; mainly if it's freshly rained, though it's been because someone was too close to my bumper also.

I did want to add (but was distracted earlier) they also can use it as an excuse to pull someone over. I did a couple of ride alongs back in the day and so many busts happen simply by pulling over folks with minor things like: broken head/tail light, no turn signal, running a yellow, failure to yield.

 

[Module 79L]

I've made the choice to go a couple times and been pulled over. I just explained that I'd do it the same if I had a redo; mainly if it's freshly rained, though it's been because someone was too close to my bumper also.

They changed the yellow light rules over here recently and now, as the rule says we have to stop if the light turns yellow (unless it's unsafe, blah, blah, blah), what happens is I see people slowing down for a green because they don't know if it's going to change to yellow before they pass the lights, when they're not supposed to slow down if the light is green!