No Criminal Charges Against Driver Who Struck Cyclist

[crazycanuck]

Good q oakleaf.

I'd like to give you an answer but i've no idea what strict liablity means. Feel free to look at the following Australian links (I did a search but couldn't find the answer ):

http://www.department.dotag.wa.gov.au/

http://www.nt.gov.au/justice/

http://www.ag.gov.au/

[Owlie]

CC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability
It's exactly like Oak said above. For traffic cases, it doesn't matter whether or not you knew you were doing X; all a prosecutor would need to prove was that you were doing X:
"Strict liability often applies to vehicular traffic offenses. In a speeding case, for example, whether the defendant knew he or she was exceeding the posted speed limit is irrelevant. The prosecutor would need only prove that the defendant was indeed operating the vehicle in excess of the speed limit."

[Bike Chick]

Outraged! Outraged! Outraged! Same story over and over and over.....In Illinois there is a stiff fine and penalty of jail time if you hit a construction worker (and rightfully so) and signs reminding you every time you enter a construction zone. I wish cyclists would get the same. There are penalties if you hit a cyclist but no one will prosecute.

[Catrin]

This is as sad as it is outrageous. There isan underlying message that it doesn't really matter what happens to an adult on a bike...whether that is the intended message or not that is what comes across.

[denda]

We have had 3 cyclists killed in my area in the last few weeks! One just last night. I am getting afraid to ride.
One of them was hit when the driver dropped his cell phone and reached to get it. It was reported that the cyclists were riding 3 abreast, so I don't think he will face any charges.
We all need to be alert! Drivers and cyclists.

[ivorygorgon]

Well, I hate to have an unpopular opinion, but here goes.

I am responding to some of the comments posted here. The cyclist was not killed (not that I think being paralyzed from the ribs down is great either) The motorist is being held accountable under current law, he was cited and will have to deal with whatever consequences follow from that. He will likely face a civil suit. (Don't get me wrong, I don't equate these consequences as being the same as being paralyzed).

The cyclist will have a civil case against the motorist; negligence in and of itself simply isn't a criminal act. The driver is guilty of negligence. Negligence is not a crime. Negligence is also not "strict liability," at least in CA. A plaintiff has to prove defendant was negligent.

I honestly would hate to see negligence made a criminal offense. That means every time anybody rear ended anybody else, or was negligent in any other way, it would be a crime.

I am not saying that I think what happened was ok, in fact, it is a tremendous tragedy and like tragedies just keep occurring. I just disagree with some of the "takes" on it and how it was handled by law enforcement. Clearly something needs to be done to increase cyclist safety. I know riding on the road terrifies me.

[denda]

I honestly would hate to see negligence made a criminal offense.

I agree with this.

[pll]

Needless to say, I disagree with the view that negligence should not be criminalized. A reasonable, responsible, person will not be texting, using the cell phone, or looking for stuff in the car while driving a heavy vehicle that can kill or severely injure other people. I hope lawyers chime in, but when negligence is criminal, I believe it is against some standard of a reasonable person. rear ending someone would not be criminal unless the driver engaged in irresponsible behavior while driving.

[tctrek]

Not sure, but I think it's the same if you hit a pedestrian or if you hit another car. If they can't prove you were negligent or did it on purpose, then it's not a crime. It's so incredibly sad that this guy came to Ride Across America and now he will never walk again, but it doesn't look like the person that hit him committed a crime.

[Charlotte Berry]

Driver kills a pregnant women on a bike. Car slowed, looks at her and then leaves.

Video...
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?se...les&id=7609051

[Deborajen]

In my opinion, "inattentive driving" implies the driver wasn't paying attention/wasn't paying enough attention and something bad could have happened or something like a fender bender happened. "Negligent driving" implies that the driver didn't uphold responsibility for controlling the car, either by being inattentive or going too fast around a curve, etc., and something bad did happen as a result of it. If a driver swerves off the road and hits a cyclist who was riding on the shoulder and the cyclist is seriously injured, the driver should be ticketed for inattentive driving and also be charged with negligent driving, and negligent driving should carry stiffer penalties varying depending on the degree of negligence and the degree of damage/injiury done.

I agree with an earlier post that a car can be a deadly weapon. That's what our laws seem to miss. They're treated more like a tool that we're "entitled to." It's not right.

[buffybike]

Outraged! Outraged! Outraged! Same story over and over and over.....In Illinois there is a stiff fine and penalty of jail time if you hit a construction worker (and rightfully so) and signs reminding you every time you enter a construction zone. I wish cyclists would get the same. There are penalties if you hit a cyclist but no one will prosecute.

Excellent point, Bike Chick.

The driver who hit me only got a citation. I, on the other hand, got $10,000+ in medical bills.