No charges for off-duty cop who killed 13-year-old girl with cruiser. Prosecutor says it doesn't matter if he was speeding

boing
23

Then you aren’t operating your vehicle within the law. Everywhere has a basic duty to operate within conditions. If you can’t se a stationary object, then you aren’t operating at a speed you can control. The speed limit is just that, the maximum allowed by law, not a guaranteed safe operating speed. But you’ve also moved the goalposts away from the reality of the situation. This is an area with street lighting and residential and commercial uses. He was violating speed laws in an area where people are a fully expected part of the streetscape.

It wouldn’t have. His statement is that he saw them and couldn’t stop in time. That means if he had the 30-100 feet of extra stopping distance that operating within the law would have provided, she’d be alive. The area has no street parking and no major visual obstructions. It is lit, not as well as I would like, but we aren’t talking about a dark country road.

11 Likes
24

If that is what you were taught then you should get your money back. Reaction time remains constant but travel distance (and time to come to a stop) increases with speed.
And, as any sarcastic traffic cop will tell you, a speed limit is not a target, you should drive at a speed which reflects the conditions, exceeding a speed limit to get to your girlfriend’s house a few seconds earlier is not acceptable for any driver.

8 Likes
25

Sorry, I think you are wrong say speed was not a deciding factor.

The man was doing “between 47 and 55 miles per hour” and should have been doing at most 35.

The vast majority of pedestrians survive being hit at 35 and the vast majority of pedestrians hit at 55mph will die.

When someone is breaking a speed limit of 35mph by that much speed is always a decisive factor.

10 Likes
26

Crash, not accident

8 Likes
27

When I was in my 20s a young kid in Detroit rode his bike into traffic a few feet in front of me, I slammed on the brakes but it didn’t matter I hit the kid and he went over my hood. The speed limit was 35mph and a very busy street.

I got out and some bystanders ran over including an off duty firefighter. They kept the kid from moving until an ambulance arrived. No cell phones so someone had to go to a house and find a phone, seemed like forever.

I was so shaken I couldn’t drive, I called my dad to take me to the hospital. The kid was okay. I talked to his grandma, I said I wanted to get him a new bike, she said absolutely not and apologized to me.

Not that it matters but I was a young white man and he was maybe 10 years old and black. Everyone on the street was black, they were all giving statements that it wasn’t my fault, the boy rode out into traffic without looking. It was a busy street with lots of people walking and driving.

Thinking about that still freaks me out because it could have ended in a much different way, not for me but for the kid.

In other words, sometimes an accident is actually an accident and can’t be anticipated or prevented.

This is a tragic accident but from all accounts that’s exactly what it was, a tragic accident.

If the driver was driving the speed limit or the girl wasn’t under the influence she might still be alive, that’s not victim blaming. That’s the circumstances of a tragic accident. It’s also not criminal.

2 Likes
28

Once again, the speed limit is the maximum advised speed not a target, if conditions are not optimum (including it being nighttime) then it is on the driver to take that into account. If, as the investigation estimates claim, the driver was exceeding the speed limit then he has run out of excuses.

6 Likes
29

Let’s say for the sake of argument the driver was doing 55 in a 35.

Per Pedestrian Crash Analysis Shows That Even at Low Speeds, Accidents Often Cause Severe Injuries [which, dammit, often uses “accident” instead of “crash”, even in the document title, sorry], at 35 mph the severe injury rate in a crash is 40.7%, mortality 10.5%, combined 51.1% . At 55 mph these numbers are 34.9%, 43.0%, and 77.9% combined. (Being very nitpicky, still a bare minority of cases are deaths.)

I just don’t see a prosecutor proving beyond a reasonable doubt that but-for-the-speeding the victim would have survived; 10.5% chance of death is a better chance to be sure but still substantial risk.

It is also worth stating that US driving culture is quite cavalier about speeding. Enforcement of the limit in the 5-10 mph range above it is unheard-of most places, and roads are deliberately engineered with speeds substantially above the limit in mind. (I am not familiar with the road/intersection in question of course.) And “yes, my client was speeding, but was not driving at a speed that was at all atypical for this road” speaks to the question of recklessness and is absolutely something the defense attorney would say.

30

It takes twice as far to stop at 55 than at 35 mph. Anyone who doesn’t get that probably shouldn’t be driving at either speed. (not directed at you personally, just its a frustrating thread)

Presumably those speeds you’re quoting are the vehicle’s speed at the time of crash, which misses the point. Depending on how far away he was when he saw her and started braking, the difference in driving speeds (55 vs. 35) could have been the difference between the driver still going 30 mph or having come to a complete stop by the time he reached the girl.

6 Likes
31

Seriously, if driving over the speed limit makes so little difference that it’s not even relevant that someone who killed a person was breaking the law at the time, why do we even have them? Why do cops like this one fine people for violating them, when speeding is apparently a shrug for them even when they run a kid over?

I can’t begin to fathom how so many can argue that a police officer was doing something illegal, killed someone in the process, and it’s just somehow beside the point.

14 Likes
32

It’s actually not a mystery.

Putnam County Prosecuting Attorney Mark Sorsaia said due to the cruiser being an older model, the only way the black box would have been activated is if an airbag had deployed and it didn’t.

4 Likes
33

Other studies indicate a much higher difference in mortality rates:

"The average risk of death for a pedestrian reaches 10% at an impact speed of 23 mph, 25% at 32 mph, 50% at 42 mph, 75% at 50 mph, and 90% at 58 mph"
Impact Speed and a Pedestrian’s Risk of Severe Injury or Death - AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.

“At 32mph 25% die at 50mph 75% die.”

3 Likes
34

Other studies indicate a much higher difference in mortality rates:

"The average risk of death for a pedestrian reaches 10% at an impact speed of 23 mph, 25% at 32 mph, 50% at 42 mph, 75% at 50 mph, and 90% at 58 mph"

Interesting, fair shake on that. But my point about proving things beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal prosecution still stands.

Also I haven’t read up on West Virginia statutes on this, but many places the law is written such that for a vehicular homicide or involuntary manslaughter prosecution to happen in a situation like this, the conduct on the driver’s part has to go beyond mere ordinary rule-breaking. That it has to constitute recklessness or at least gross negligence. I just don’t think that the way a jury will think about it, that driving (maybe as little as) 47 mph in a 35 zone, or even (as much as) 55 in a 35 really reaches that bar.

New York State prosecutors used to follow this extremely frustrating “Rule of Two” notion where they wouldn’t even consider something like a vehicular manslaughter charge unless the driver was breaking at least two laws with his or her driving, mere speeding didn’t pass muster.

Personally I wouldn’t like to see people thrown in jail for crashes like this, but I would like to see an extremely muscular culture of permanently revoking people’s driving privileges in the event of an injurious or deadly crash. That the law should just have a strongly built-in belief that the driver has the strongest responsibility for road safety and should be presumed to be at fault in the case of a victimized vulnerable road user unless there is tremendous exculpatory evidence to the contrary.

This is how the Dutch handle this and it works well. Same presumption of responsibility in Japan, again, much much safer road culture there.

But at least in 2023 in the United States we’re not there yet.

From @Scientist :

Depending on how far away he was when he saw her and started braking, the difference in driving speeds (55 vs. 35) could have been the difference between the driver still going 30 mph or having come to a complete stop by the time he reached the girl.

Oh, 100% agree. Though if a person steps right in front of a moving car (or, um, me, on a bike) close enough to its arrival there’s possibly no speed that would have been slow enough to prevent a collision.

36

“No charges for BLACK MALE DRIVER
who killed 13-year-old girl with cruiser. Prosecutor says it doesn’t matter that he was speeding.”

Would you ever see THAT headline?

5 Likes
37

Or, imagine the scenario where a school bus driver of any race or gender crashes, harming the passengers. Imagine the fact that the bus driver was speeding being discounted as not relevant to the case.
I can’t imagine it.

5 Likes
38

Absolutely. I remember being in a “survey group” that was actually a lawyer prepping to get his client off on hitting someone in the crosswalk. Four-lane road, large truck in the left lane, right lane clear. Light changed to green as the car was approaching so they didn’t slow down, and hit the pedestrian that was crossing, hidden by the truck.

I was the only one who was saying that the driver was 100% at fault for not properly verifying that there was no one crossing the road before proceeding.

If you can’t see, then you stop the damn car and look. The other people were siding with the driver, claiming it was the pedestrian’s fault for not being sure they could cross in time, which is what the lawyer was trying to argue. I pissed him off royally for refusing to change my mind on this.

No idea whether the case went to court or not, but I hope he lost.

7 Likes
39

In a situation like this you’re right–if there’s a stopped vehicle you should figure there might be something in the road causing it.

However, in the more general case that’s simply not viable. They teach you not to over-drive your headlights–but I’ve seen posted night speed limits that are far above the speed at which you can see non-reflective objects in time and we don’t consider deer strikes at-fault accidents.

The reality is we accept that on higher speed roads non-reflective objects are likely to be hit. Unfortunately, this was a pedestrian. She was old enough to know better, primary fault lies with her.

40

You’re saying the reality is that we accept it in a thread full of people saying it’s unacceptable and we shouldn’t let this happen, and you’re using the “acceptance” as a trump card over the actual laws in place. Maybe take a step back and consider how strong a counter argument that is.

4 Likes
42

Good advice

Once again, they are limits not targets – nothing is compelling you to drive at the limits.

As soon as you exceed the limits you are at fault for any consequences – no excuses.

43

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.