Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Negligence more relevant in crash cases.

This car versus car case in the LA Times report, on a possibly unfair conviction, is laced throughout with an exposition of more prosecutions, in driving crash cases, where participants end up with fatal injuries. The reporter writes that acting with negligence can get manslaughter charges. I wonder what a bicycle or pedestrian crash specialist attorney would say? Looks like cyclists and pedestrians want a finding of negligence or gross negligence from the drivers actions, relative vehicle speeds, and likelihood of injury from the vehicle types. If any of these factors play into the definition of negligence. The article says that crash based "criminal prosecutions is rising, in part because the state has aggressive legal standards and in part because, prosecutors say, advances in accident investigation technology allow them to more precisely understand the causes of fatal accidents."

The article unfortunately disproves that statement and Ralph Vartabedian the writer exhibits quite a bit of hyperventilation implying that everybody can be in a crash and get prosecuted; contrary to the overwhelming data from NITSA, DMV, and insurance institutes which says that crashes are caused by negligent drivers who are characterized as having two or more points against them. The rescheduled Pedestrian Safety & Advocacy Conference will be discussing issues like this- see Challenge Area 3, 7, and 8.

Standing out from the mostly maudlin crap in here, "one veteran accident investigator Robin T. Harrison said. "I have spent my life doing accident reconstruction, and the police regularly lead the charge in lousy accident investigation."" So maybe this would be good piece to talk to the local police chief about too since crashes and driving (gasoline) make up a big portion of their underfunded budgets.

No comments: