Again you have zero idea what the speed limit is for that road. Just because there are residential homes on that road does not mean it’s a 25 mph limit. It looks wide and is most likely a pass through road where the limit is higher.
And that red car even moving at 35 compared to the cop’s Jeep moving at 10 would “look” fast.
As someone else responding to me pointed out IT DOES NOT MATTER. The cop had a stop sign and didn’t stop. He is also crossing two lanes of travel. It is HIS responsibility to ensure they are clear.
I am also confounded by your mention of a jury. In my state this would be a police report of the incident and the insurance companies would determine fault. So how a jury comes into play is completely alien to me.
Any insurance company with this video will roast this cop alive and take every penny from his comprehensive collision and balloon coverage. This kid if he has a good lawyer will settle out of court for the max this guy has for coverage (if he is a home owner that should be around 1mil. If not then probably 300k).
And before you finish that reply you are doing I don’t give a fuck to have an argument about the proper speed limit of the street. The cop is wrong. Period. End of story.
Should the kid be watched by the cops and they pull his ass over for speeding when they catch him doing so. Yes. But that has zero relevance in this situation.
I’m sorry, but you’re obviously out of your depth here, and not speaking from experience. I represent people that are getting screwed by their insurance companies for their injuries and other damages in auto accidents. Juries decide fault and appropriate damages in these cases. As you can see by my edit above, I checked street view, and the limit is 25 there. I have worked closely with damage experts, who, among other things, calculate speed in an accident based on how far and in what direction vehicles end up from the point of collision. I’m not an expert, but that’s not a 35 mph crash. In excess of 50, like I said, I would guess around 60.
You’re dead wrong about fault (side note, Michigan is a no-fault state). Like I said, both are at fault, but driving at that speed in that area is reckless, and you don’t get a free pass because someone runs a stop sign. I don’t know why you’re so keen to defend this idiot. Because the other driver was an asshole cop, I guess.
I hope no one drives like that in the neighborhood where your kids play.
I’m not sure why it seems to be a point of controversy to acknowledge that it seems that both drivers likely were at some degree of fault in this accident through a combination of speeding and running a stop sign (not saying it’s 50/50, but some shared liability seems reasonable) BUT the shared liability is more than offset by the fact the officer who was definitely at fault abused a position of authority to try to blame the other driver and absolve himself.
I think the point of contention is the article and thread are about the abuse of power by the cop. Not about determining who was to blame on the accident.
But you know it’s the internet. And drolls gotta droll.
Absolutely! The cop doesn’t even pause to see whether anyone in the car was injured.
I would think a responsible human would first make sure nobody is injured, call an ambulance and offer first aid as needed, and only then (if they’re a cop) issue whatever tickets they deem appropriate, certainly not at gunpoint.
I am entirely comfortable saying the red car was being driven too fast for the conditions (a relatively narrow residential street with on-street parking and no painted lane divisions). It is quite possible that the driver was driving consistent with the speed limit - many North American cities set their speed limits much too fast for the physical type of street. For example, the speed limit on my street is about 1.5 times the fastest safe speed. There are active campaigns to get the city to lower speed limits on residential streets, but also considerable resistance from people who are absolutely outraged at the idea that they might have to slow down slightly for the first and last few hundred meters of their drive.
It is not at all clear to me that either street is a main road. They look to be the same width, neither has lane paint, both have on street parking, and both have the same grass medians between sidewalk and asphalt.
Again, in my neighbourhood, every intersection has a stop sign, and on sections where it’s all residential streets the direction of the right of way alternates - basically if you’re driving in a straight line you’ll have a stop sign at one intersection, right of way at the next, and a stop sign again at the next…
Despite qualified arguments from quori, I am going to agree with you (based on admittedly no experience with Michigan comparative fault cases). Narrow roads like that, in a residential neighborhood? C’mon, the speed limit is probably maxed at 25mph. I have a pretty good feel for recognizing relative velocity in videos like this, and the red car is moving way too fast to completely absolve that driver of any liability, despite the obvious preceding violation by the officer in running the stop. At the very least, just watch the force of the t-bone knock the larger cherokee around. I bet you $20 the red car was exceeding 45mph, and neither could have avoided this collision or a child chasing a ball into the road.
The car before the cop and the car after the cop also failed to (fully) stop at the stop sign, but at least they slowed way down to make sure the intersection was available.
Indeed. But the hypothetical question is whether, if he had stopped, he would have seen the red car, given its high speed. We have no knowledge of how much of the road to the cop’s right was visible at the junction and whether the red car was within the visible part. The red car really did look like it was speeding.
Happened to me, once. Making a turn across traffic at a crossroads. Road I was crossing had a dip before crossing. I started across as no cars visible. Car comes up out of dip at double the speed limit and I stop having only moved 2 yards. Car does not even swerve, just clips my front bumper. Several witnesses tell cops the other car was speeding, I was stationary at time of impact and had no chance. I still get a ticket for not yielding. Technically as correct a decision as this cop needing to get a ticket for rolling a stop sign. Which is to say, correct - but the other guy (in this case the red car) probably needs a ticket too, but nothing is provable relating to their actions, or the actions of the car that hit me.
Jesus, nobody is out of their depth. We’re just all making assumptions based on video and google maps. Nobody is really 100% wrong or right except to say that the cop definitely ran the stop sign.
It seems pretty reasonable to assume that the red car was going way too fast. One guy on the Reddit post of this clocked him at 65 using G-maps and video but who knows?
n=1: I had this happen to me when I was a teenager. I stopped at a stop sign but it had just started snowing and I drifted out into the intersection. The guy that hit me was doing around 80mph in a 25 zone, spun me like a top, and hit three other cars.
You know what i didn’t do though? I didn’t get out of my car looking for a fight. I was predominantly concerned with everyone’s well-being. The insurance companies eventually laid all the responsibility on the other driver but of course, the snow made it different than this situation.
It’s not that narrow (40 feet) and does indeed have painted lanes (two lanes travelling one-way) with additional painted lines for the parking lanes. The paint isn’t apparent from the security cam footage, but it’s there.
It’s also a street that happened to be four lanes (two each direction) until splitting a block before this intersection. That doesn’t entirely excuse his speed, of course, as he’s still likely going faster than the speed limit he would have been facing on the four-lane road as well.
Both are at fault; the cop ran the sign and the red car was surely speeding.
Now, if I were the red car, I would argue that the 25 mph posted sign is impermissible under Michigan law. It is (probably) such because in 2008 Michigan did away with residential speed limits, instituting instead two options for setting speed limits – prima facie limits or those set using measurements from a survey by Michigan State Police. Most cities have not updated their signs or conducted speed studies sufficient to legally safeguard their limits. Very likely, Detroit has not conducted an official speed study on this stretch of Livernois. As such, the de facto speed limit here is 55 mph (I know, insane, but that’s what the law says), which is the statewide maximum limit for a general road. That red car may still be speeding with a 55 mph limit, but the ticket will be much smaller than the one he’s definitely getting for how fast he was going on Livernois.
