Police using dashcam video of a fail to remain 4 a Ped Hit & run

[old4570]

Yeah , those phones are a health hazard ...
But the responsibility of operating a lethal weapon ( car ) ..

A little like the guy in the woods with a rifle during hunting season VS a bush walker out in the woods during hunting season .
Who you gona blame if the bush walker is shot by the guy with the gun ?

Ultimately the responsibility lies with the person with the lethal weapon ..
Unless the bush walker is running around in a fur coat and antlers on their head - I guess that could be considered suicide !

So if the pedestrian was in the right - they were in the right ! ( If they crossed against the light ? then they would be in the wrong )
I am not aware of what the rules are there , but here if the pedestrian has the green they are golden .. The lethal weapon gives way !

 

[GTA Driver]

I have almost been hit a few times crossing the street at an intersection. In one case I yelled, another I stopped. I establish eye contact. I believe the motorist is entirely at fault, but just as one drivers have defensive driving, I have learned one needs to do defensive walking. Given I have almost been hit as a pedestrian when NOT jaywalking when I worked downtown , 10 to 20 years ago before smartphones became a scourge on society, I can't accept people walking while distracted.

I'm so sick of a world that teaches people they can be reckless with their own lives, but it's OK to behave that way if other people are doing worse... and you can then claim you've "done nothing wrong".

There is a family suing a municipality as the street lighting was not adequate and a car hit and killed a teen who chose to cross against a redlight.

https://www.insauga.com/family-of-mississauga-teen-killed-by-suv-suing-city-for-4-million

 

[Module 79L]

A legal oddity on pedestrians here in SC USA. If a pedestrian is crossing on a designated crosswalk or at an intersection, vehicles must yield to them, but if they are crossing a road anywhere else pedestrians must yield to the vehicles:

SC Code Of Laws SECTION 56-5-3150. Crossing at other than crosswalks.
(a) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.

Phil

It's not that odd, over here it's the same thing, it's just basic common sense transposed into the law.

 

[Nigel]

It's not that odd, over here it's the same thing, it's just basic common sense transposed into the law.

It is not quite the same here. If a car driver is turning into a road then any pedestrian already crossing that road has right of way, doesn't matter if it is a marked crossing or not. Also we don't have marked crossings at intersections unless they are light controlled, in which case both pedestrians and cars have to obey the lights. Also, just because somebody was supposed to give way and doesn't, it does not mean you are entitled to drive over them, you are still supposed to avoid any contact and still have to take some blame for any incident, if you were able to avoid it and didn't then you probably take all the blame!

 

[SawMaster]

Yes, if someone is already using that section of road legally then you must avoid them but that includes pedestrians too. Sometimes it seems that someone forgot to tell the pedestrians about that Regardless this, any adult who willingly places themselves in the path of oncoming traffic which does not appear to be stopping for them is headed for a well-deserved "Darwin Award"

Phil

 

[Module 79L]

If a car driver is turning into a road then any pedestrian already crossing that road has right of way, doesn't matter if it is a marked crossing or not.

If the pedestrian is already crossing the road, of course the motorist has no other choice than to give way. I don't believe anyone is going to drive over a jaywalker just because they have the ROW over them, I'm sure the motorists' principle of the duty of protection regarding pedestrians is the same in most laws, but if the pedestrian is still on the pavement in that same scenario and there's no marked crossing, according to our rules they don't have the ROW. The rules also say that it's the pedestrians' duty to make sure they cross safely and without causing any constraints to traffic when they do it outside of the designated places. In case of an accident with a pedestrian that didn't observe these rules it's always the pedestrian's fault.

 

[Deleted member 46308]

Yes, if someone is already using that section of road legally then you must avoid them but that includes pedestrians too. Sometimes it seems that someone forgot to tell the pedestrians about that Regardless this, any adult who willingly places themselves in the path of oncoming traffic which does not appear to be stopping for them is headed for a well-deserved "Darwin Award"

Phil

Agree

 

[old4570]

I dont know what legality has to do with it !
Even if a pedestrian is crossing illegally , you don't have the right to kill or injure them ..
I can understand that if its dark and a pedestrian steps out without looking and gets hit its on them ..
But if a car driver has the time to see the pedestrian and stop and does not and just sais FK U Buddy .. That would quite possibly be premeditated murder or attempted murder depending on the outcome of the contact .
Be terrible to have a cam in the car that recorded everything , including a drivers FU before killing a pedestrian crossing the road illegally ...
Might land one a few decades in the pokey ..

 

[kamkar]

My friend actually went to court in the mid/late 90ties.
On his way to work he had to cross thru a intersection at the base of a bridge, and though he was stopped for red then started when it became green and then was hit my a cyclist coming down from the bridge so fast that after he hit the bull bar on my friends land rover he almost flew / tumbled all the way into the river close by.

The judge was arguing my friend should have seen the cyclist braking the law and let him, but unlucky for the judge my friend are no push over and he off course argued against to great amusement of the many law students in the audience.
In the end my friend was cleared of all wrong doing.

But things have changed now so i think even with ped being the green or red hitting one will at least mean you have to retake the license, needless with my cameras in the car i will argue against that too, as a motorist you cant always be on the lookout for people breaking the law i actually think that would be unsafe, you must rightfully assume that everyone else are also upholding the law.

 

[Module 79L]

I dont know what legality has to do with it!

I can understand that if its dark and a pedestrian steps out without looking and gets hit its on them...

That's when legality comes into play. Too many pedestrians think that their vulnerability overrides everybody else's rights.

 

[old4570]

Once again I failed ...
Two wrongs dont make a right ... ( Is the simple way to put it )
Just because some one else does the wrong thing / does not give anyone else the right to do the wrong thing .
Here in Oz we have something called duty of care .. So if you have time to avoid a situation , then you are legally obliged to do such !
It matter not what others around you are doing , it is each drivers responsibility to drive safely no matter others faults . ( Or suicidal tendencies )

But watching too much cam action ! I see that a lot of people are simply bloody minded fools ( Stupid ) and will push right into an accident just because some one else is breaking the rules and they don't want to give ...
Too much ? Testosterone ? Or too little grey matter ? / or a combination ....
Personally I will give and swear blue murder for a few seconds and let it go . ( And put them on youtube - I mean what are cams for ? )

 

[Gibson99]

Too many pedestrians think that their vulnerability overrides everybody else's rights.

and the laws of physics. a car going even only 10 mph CANNOT stop in time if you dart out in front of it.

 

[Gibson99]

Once again I failed ...
Two wrongs dont make a right ... ( Is the simple way to put it )
Just because some one else does the wrong thing / does not give anyone else the right to do the wrong thing .
Here in Oz we have something called duty of care .. So if you have time to avoid a situation , then you are legally obliged to do such !
It matter not what others around you are doing , it is each drivers responsibility to drive safely no matter others faults . ( Or suicidal tendencies )

But watching too much cam action ! I see that a lot of people are simply bloody minded fools ( Stupid ) and will push right into an accident just because some one else is breaking the rules and they don't want to give ...
Too much ? Testosterone ? Or too little grey matter ? / or a combination ....
Personally I will give and swear blue murder for a few seconds and let it go . ( And put them on youtube - I mean what are cams for ? )

i bolded the key section in your post - IF YOU HAVE TIME. often, there simply is not enough time to react, much less actually take corrective/avoidance action. and that's when it hits the fan. and that's why we have cameras.

 

[DT MI]

i bolded the key section in your post - IF YOU HAVE TIME. often, there simply is not enough time to react, much less actually take corrective/avoidance action. and that's when it hits the fan. and that's why we have cameras.

+1. It was exactly that type of situation (woman walking out into traffic with her face stuck in her phone) that got me seriously thinking and getting my first camera.

 

[GTA Driver]

Apparently, as of just a few days ago the police have identified the make and model. Something that people watching the video had a good idea of when the video was release two weeks ago.

Police identify make and model of car in shocking hit-and-run video

 

[old4570]

A) Police seldom release details
B) Details are released when they hit a wall ( information dries up - trail goes cold )

I would imagine there would be a nice bump in the front of the vehicle , so where was it repaired ?
Or was it parked in the garage ? In the hopes that everyone would forget ?

Perhaps the vehicle has been repaired in another state / country ?

 

[old4570]

i bolded the key section in your post - IF YOU HAVE TIME. often, there simply is not enough time to react, much less actually take corrective/avoidance action. and that's when it hits the fan. and that's why we have cameras.

Obviously ...
But are we talking about the OP scenario ? or something entirely different .
There are 1001 ways to run down pedestrians !
Sometimes the fault lays with the pedestrian and some times with the driver of the car . As well some times there is plenty of blame to go around ..
Every scenario I have been involved in the blame has been with the car driver .. Usually some bloody minded idiot failing to give way .

I had a postal van driver fail to give way on a pedestrian crossing ( What an idiot )
A friend was nearly run down while we were walking by a car turning into the street we were crossing ( we had right of way ) , if I had not stopped and pulled my friend out of the way the car driver would have run him down ...
Blatant attempted homicide ( we were kids ) , now I would find the puke and let him/her know my displeasure at being a homicide victim .. ( These people are scum and deserve jail time )
I have had Police fail to give way ( no emergency except maybe they were in a hurry to get their lunch )
I just dont know if people are just STUPID or just callus to the point of being monsters capable of homicide . ( Both I dare say )
And I feel that some times ROAD RAGE is justified .. ( Some times = When some one tries to murder you )
I know , some people are completely oblivious to their homicidal tendencies ..

Like the woman that drove against a one way Exit ( she entered ) ... I looked at her and asked her what her problem was ? She just did not get what she had done wrong , or she was just full of it !
Honestly we should bring back public flogging .. A few reminders from the cat 0 nine tails will sort out people quickly ..
Rather than demerit points , it should be lashes from the Cat O nine tails .

 

[old4570]

Question !
Do we know if the pedestrian was crossing LEGALLY or Not !

 

[GTA Driver]

A) Police seldom release details
B) Details are released when they hit a wall ( information dries up - trail goes cold )

Most of the time point A and B are true. I agree they try their own resources before going to the public, but I have seen a few cases where they have had success when promptly giving what details they can to the press and request public help.

Case - 63 year old pedestrian from New Brunswick dies in a hit and run where I believe the driver was drunk.

1. Oct 4 - accident
2. Oct 6 - News provides what details it gets from the police, which requests help from public - https://globalnews.ca/news/3790520/...-hit-and-run-was-visiting-from-new-brunswick/. Police are looking for 2014 to 2016 Nissan Rogue
3. Oct 10 - Still in the public mind, more details about victim vechicle they suspect is involved - http://torontosun.com/2017/10/10/hi...mily/wcm/4f1dab03-474d-431a-8edc-3c3679345309
4. Oct 11 - Police find vehicle. It was a body shop and the alert owner operator called the police as the incident hit the news close to a week before - http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/fatal-hit-and-run-vehicle-1.4349310 . Owner not co-operating.
5. Oct 14 - Women 28 arrested and charged - http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/fatal-hit-and-run-new-brunswick-woman-1.4355334.

This Oct 4 to 14 was solved without a dash cam but reliable information of the vehicle from a witness. Police relied on the co-operation of the public. Regarding to the Oct 31 accident caught on a"potato cam"- the police released the video on Nov 15, two weeks after the accident and had no idea of make and model.

I would imagine there would be a nice bump in the front of the vehicle , so where was it repaired ?
Or was it parked in the garage ? In the hopes that everyone would forget ?

Perhaps the vehicle has been repaired in another state / country ?

Its a big province and one just has to drive a few hours in any direction to a city which wouldn't carry this local incident. I am familiar with the homes around there, usually two car garages. It could stay in there for a month or two and the incident is forgotten.

 

[Nigel]

Question !
Do we know if the pedestrian was crossing LEGALLY or Not !

In the UK it wouldn't matter since the car driver clearly had time to avoid the "accident" or at least reduce the impact. They managed to turn the corner normally so where clearly in control of the car but didn't even slow down to avoid the collision.

The pedestrian was walking across a marked crossing so even if they didn't have right of way at the time, the car driver should have been driving so that he/she could avoid an accident with any pedestrians that were already on the crossing or vehicles that were already using that road.

In the UK the pedestrian would have right of way since they were already using that road before the car driver turned into the road and started using it.

However, this was in America where it appears that people live by different rules and if someone breaks a rule then it appears to be OK to kill them?