User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:13:21 AM EDT
[#1]
if he was doin 15 over thats reckless driving right?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:15:00 AM EDT
[#2]
How you going to prove he was traveling too fast in court? You may be right, but the judge won't just take your word for it...
EPOCH |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:15:11 AM EDT
[#3]
Keep bees much do ya? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:19:30 AM EDT
[#4]
I have been known to assist the local police from the air and assisted in a high speed pursuit of an escaped inmate two days ago from the air. I was returning home from my morning flight. I might get the judge's ear. It is not between the other party and myself, but between me and the judge. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:20:06 AM EDT
[#5]
Whether or not he was speeding, the fail to yield would still apply. If someone is approaching so close that your pulling out causes a crash, you pulled out when you shouldn't have.
There's a standard multiplier (1.47) that you apply to speed in MPH. The result you get is how many feet per second you move at that speed. 50 MPH=73.5 fps, 60 MPH=88.2 fps. Even if he was a football field away, at 50 MPH he'll cover that distance in a hair over 4 seconds. Will your car accelerate, after a turn, and be up to 50 MPH by that time? It's always best to wait. If you take it to court, unless the other driver and officer fail to show, you'll very likely lose your case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:20:12 AM EDT
[#6]
While his speed may have contributed to the fact that there was an accident the matter at hand is that you did not yield to oncoming traffic. Had his speeding been observed he also could have received a citation but that wouldn't make yours any less applicable.
I don't think you've got a leg to stand on if you try to fight it. Sorry.... Michael |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:34:20 AM EDT
[#7]
All you can do is try. No harm in that- maybe the judge will take pity and cut you a break.
Oh, and...
Boy are you going to get shit here for that... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:35:32 AM EDT
[#8]
I tried that argument once, was told forget it. No way to prove how fast he was going.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:52:23 AM EDT
[#9]
If the guy was skidding, won't the tire marks prove he was speeding? Unless the officer took it into account.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:03:22 AM EDT
[#10]
Guess that depends how long they are. It is possible to produce skid marks while traveling under the speed limit. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:07:04 AM EDT
[#11]
Without considering the merits of your possible case, I would say fight it.
Go here: www.motorists.com I understand that traffic laws are needed, and that penalties are the only way to enforce them, but I also live near a city where the traffic enforcement is a way of commerce, and enforcement absurdly instituted due to the money involved. Also the manner in which it is done seems to have little to do with public safety... Just my rant... It seems that 95% of traffic tickets are not contested, and of the 5% that are, a large percentage of them get a reduced penalty of some sort, if not removed completely. This means on simple stats, that if you contest it, your chances are pretty good. It seems to be the case that the system is set up to collect money more than it wants to try cases in court. Read up on your situation at the above resource and decide what makes sense for you. Good luck, |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:09:54 AM EDT
[#12]
The primary cause of the accident would be failure to yield, with the other driver speeding being a contributing factor.
Pay the ticket. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:21:15 AM EDT
[#13]
Skid marks alone will not give the speed. Since there was a collision, some of the energy was used up to move, and damage the vehicles that would have created longer skid marks. If you know how far and in which direction the cars moved after impact, and each vehicles weight you could get a speed. A more simple approach would be to do a time study. From the begginning of the skid, back the other car up for 1.6 seconds (accepted reaction time) at the speed limit( mph * 1.47= FPS).
thats where the other driver was when you pulled into his lane. now bring him back foward at the speed limit. Take the amount of time in seconds that it takes you to enter the roadway. Would the collision have still occoured? Unfortunatly, no matter how in depth you reconstruct the scene, the question remains. Sir, if you saw this car, and you saw that it was speeding, why did you pull out in front of it? If you didnt see it you were wrong, If you did not properly judge its speed, you were wrong. Good Luck, Stay Safe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:58:33 AM EDT
[#14]
If someone crashed into you because you went into the intersection then its your fault.
Were I on a jury I would convict. I would not convict someone going 70 in a 50 provided as long as they arent driving dangerously to those around them. Speeding isnt dangerous, not paying attention is dangerous. IMO you were the one who was not paying attention, you caused the problem, you are at fault. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 12:48:23 PM EDT
[#15]
You have a duty to only enter the roadway/intersection when safe to do so. If a car in approaching the intersection at 20mph or 120MPH it doesnt matter. You dont enter until safe to do so. As for should you fight the ticket? Of course, the officer will appreciate the court overtime. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 12:55:33 PM EDT
[#16]
Pay it and move on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 1:01:10 PM EDT
[#17]
Traffic tickets are like a criminal case in that regardless of the mitigating factors the fact remains that you violated the law.
However, in the case of a civil trail involving injuries you would be able to argue that a percentage of fault could be assigned to the driver that hit you due to speeding. Bottom line, you failed to yield. You caused the accident. One more thing....your esitmate don't mean squat in a court of law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 1:21:45 PM EDT
[#18]
In VA, the speeder would be at fault:
§ 46.2-823. Unlawful speed forfeits right-of-way. The driver of any vehicle traveling at an unlawful speed shall forfeit any right-of-way which he might otherwise have under this article. (Code 1950, § 46-238; 1952, c. 666; 1956, c. 533; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-221; 1985, c. 218; 1989, c. 727.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 2:01:21 PM EDT
[#19]
So if I hit someone who is doing 51 in a 50, they are at fault?  What brainiac came up with that one? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 4:43:34 PM EDT
[#20]
I pursued a stolen car (nephew stole it from aunt) that eventually T-boned a Toyota in the middle of an intersection that had only a two way stop. The girl in the Toyota stopped and looked then proceeded without even being able to see the approaching stolen vehicle. There IS a point where reasonable measures have been taken to be sure of safe traversing of the intersection. I am curious where that point is. I humbly accept my portion of the fault but refuse to accept that in a case where I was 18" from being clear of the intersection and the vehicle with the right of way was speeding that I bear all the blame. Stop signs are there for a reason, so are speed limits. Planerench out. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 4:44:33 PM EDT
[#21]
Shut up and pay your tax peasant.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 4:52:12 PM EDT
[#22]
Cops are not going to issue a citation to someone who is the victim of being hit by stolen car. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 4:52:16 PM EDT
[#23]
I whole heartedly agree. However, I also believe that if you exceed the limit you are obligated to a higher level of responsibilty. In hind sight I shouldn't have entered the intersection. If the other vehicle was doing the speed limit there would not have been a collision. I just need a faster car. If my van were not such a dog I would have been at the next intersection!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 4:52:20 PM EDT
[#24]
FIXED. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 4:55:59 PM EDT
[#25]
The question is the same if the owner had been driving. If the traffic with the obligation to yield is not close enough to see or be able to deduce the speed of an oncomming vehicle how can one be completely at fault? Thanks for the answers. I will probably go just so I can stop by and jaw with the deputies as I don't get an excuse to go over there very often. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 5:00:36 PM EDT
[#26]
.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 5:04:05 PM EDT
[#27]
Idaho code49-807(2)
After having stopped, the driver shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time when such driver is moving across or within the intersection or junction of highways. 1) No person shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing. Consistent with the foregoing, every person shall drive at a safe and appropriate speed when approaching and crossing an intersection.... |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
