Especially in rural areas in Tennessee and other states.
Both were clearly wrong. The question is whether that wrongness caused an accident.
Cop: Lets slow him down but move the time so he’s at the same spot. Is there still an accident? Less severe, but yes–they were still within the minimum stopping distance.
Elderly driver: Duh–he doesn’t pull out, there can’t be an accident.
Thus the cops’ speeding has no bearing on whether there was an accident. 100% of the blame to the elderly driver.
Ferguson received a verbal reprimand for this crash,
Dammit Ferguson, you’ve been crashing into taxpayers again! This has gone well beyond the stern memo, are you hearing me?
I’ve wanted to make exactly this point for some time now.
1 Like
Bullshit, the posted speed limit is determined by the visibility of oncoming traffic, and the presence of crossing traffic. The driver making the left turn looked for oncoming traffic, expecting that the oncoming traffic was TRAVELING AT THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT.
6 Likes
You can call bullshit all you like. Doesn’t change that the responsibility is on the driver crossing the lane of travel. If you see a car that appears to be speeding and you choose to go anyway and they hit you…it was on you for crossing their lane of travel.
I am not making this stuff up. and while some localities have various degrees of traffic laws that may put the speeding above the other as @emo_pinata is stating is the case in their area; it does not change that it is the law in other places, and it is a fair bet that it is the case in most.
1 Like
The key human factors concept here is “looming”. When something’s in the distance and its size is changing on our retinas, we make a judgment about its approach. This judgment is informed both by the rate of growth and by our previous experience in similar situations. The experience part of this is hugely important, because the looming effect increases exponentially as the object gets closer. That is, lots of things with different speeds don’t change very much in the distance and then – perceptually – all of a sudden bear down on us very fast.
The reason that at least some of the blame can be taken off of the driver turning left is that reading the looming effect is highly contextual when you’re in the “far off” part of the read. The only judgment that a typical driver will have in reading a looming object is cars that are driving – within a certain margin – at a typical speed. When something is traveling at half again the typical speed of a particular road geometry, the perception of the safety margin is going to be – incorrectly – very similar to the margin perceived for a regular-speed vehicle. This is part of the reason that reckless driving is still reckless even on an empty road: cross traffic will mis-read your speed due to the looming effect.
5 Likes
It seems to me that the collision wouldn’t have happened if the off-duty cop was following the rules of the road.
7 Likes
Isn’t that illegal? In Germany, turning right on red is only allowed, when there’s a special small sign allowing it, accompanied by a small STOP sign, with the same power of a big one. And you must not turn when someone else is using the pedestrian crossing or the road. That would making it a rather severe infraction, Basically running a red light with intent.
One of the kind I will report to the police every couple of months, when I’m on the crossing.
1 Like
The US basically operates on an “if you’re not being told not to, it’s fine” system when it comes to intersection behaviors. That said, you are still expected to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk.
1 Like
Culturally it seems to have taken on the opposite of the intended meaning, now. “A few bad apples… something something. I’m sure the barrel is fine.”
And one was only rendered dangerous because of the driving of the other…
That’s begging the question. What “same spot” are we putting the cop - the place where the other driver spotted him and, misjudging his illegal speed, thought he’d have enough time to cross the road before the cop reached that point? He apparently would have been able to safely take that turn if the cop wasn’t speeding, as the accident investigator himself said that there would have been no crash if the cop had been traveling at the speed limit. You’re apparently assuming that the driver didn’t see the cop at all.
3 Likes
I do not disagree that would be the case. Unfortunately the law in most cases for this sort of thing is black and white. The vehicle crossing left through a lane of travel is ultimately responsible. EDIT: also him being off-duty is of no relevance. He should not be breaking the speed limit unless his lights are on and he is headed to a call which could happen whether on/off duty.
This b&w reasoning is precisely to prevent what @wazroth is outlining in the reply right above yours. Without the fault lying squarely in one driver’s field it causes a rat’s nest of reasoning and rationalizations as to why the other person is at fault.
Again, contact your local police force or your local insurance agency and ask what the presiding law is for your area. The majority of places are going to say “flat out it is always the fault of the vehicle crossing the lane of travel”. Right or wrong, good or bad, regardless of who is doing it…it’s their fault. This is not a wild conspiracy to protect the LEO.
Like I’ve stated above…I am just happy the couple is relatively unscathed. Their insurance will cover the damages to the vehicle and they are alive thankfully. That is the most important part of all of it.
That being said, there must obviously be some limit as to when Failure to Yield applies. What if it were the exact same circumstances, except it was night time and the police car’s headlights were out? I’m not saying there’s a bright line distinction between failing to yield and not failing to yield, but at some point the behavior of the speeding car crosses a threshold where the turning driver can’t possibly be at fault.
no doubt. and in that scenario the mitigating factor is…the driver crossing the lane cannot estimate if the lane is clear because they cannot even see the other vehicle at all. The only issue here is unless there was evidence that showed the other vehicle had their lights off, the insurance and LEO would simply state standard fault to the vehicle crossing the lane of travel…unfortunately.
another exception would be if the left turning vehicle was doing so through an intersection. If the other vehicle ran the red light and it was proven (via camera, witness, etc) then the left turning vehicle would not be at fault.
Crossing lanes of travel is dicey at best. I avoid it as much as humanly possible.
That was one of the points I was trying to make. If lights and/or sirens are on then they should be considered to be on duty, no questions.
I do not live in the US, but our driving laws are online
Here the legal debate for the elderly couple would be were they driving without due care and attention. There is a good chance that they will be found not guilty, as it is reasonable to assume that people should not be breaking the speed limit by 20mph. If they were found guilty the driver would get a fine and penalty points.
The debate for the cop is were they speeding and if they were, was it dangerous driving. The first point is proven, the second point is proven by how much faster than the speed limit they were going. Courts tend to have a very negative view on going 20mph over the limit anywhere other than on the motorways (where this kind of collision cannot happen without breaking numerous other laws, as well as successfully driving though crash barriers.). If they were found guilty then they would be facing a ban from driving as well as a fine and penalty points (which will be larger than for driving without due care and attention), and possibly a prison sentence of up to six months.
I understand that the USA is a different country with different laws, but some differences make sense in context. This case is more like WTF are they thinking?
2 Likes
It’s just a few bad apples protecting a barrel full of bad apples.
2 Likes
I’m putting the cop at the same distance he was when the couple pulled out. If he wasn’t speeding there still would be an accident.
If you were there you really should have tried to get their attention then.
2 Likes
1 Like
