Either my google skills have weakened or there was no coverage.
TV reported it as a child first then changed it to an adult that had to be airlifted from an accident scene.
When they changed it to an adult they never went back to covering it. Was on channel 7.
Thanks,
gabe
Tags:
Brendan, thank you for your strong words on this subject.
I am curious if you have any insights into how "regular people" look at this. A jury of Chainlinkers would obviously agree with your sentiment, but I can imagine that jurors who don't cycle might find it hard not to put themselves in the position of the driver. Hitting and killing someone you didn't see is something of a "worst-possible scenario" for a lot of drivers, I imagine, and I would guess they'd tend to sympathize with the defense of "I looked and I didn't see him."
Brendan Kevenides said:
Looking and failing to see what should be seen is no defense. It is an indictment.
That, of course, is a challenge in every bike case. We would deal with those issues during voir dire, picking the jury. I might ask potential jurors something like the following in order to illicit attitudes that may disqualify them from jury service:
that they're just like any other driver of a vehicle. Mr. ___, which
side do you think you're a little closer to?
any other driver; others think that bikes are a nuisance and should get
out of the way of cars, and if they don't, they get what's coming to
them. Mr. ___, which side do you think you're a little closer to?
The rest is my job during opening and closing statements, and up to the credibility of the witnesses and other evidence.
Alex Z said:
Brendan, thank you for your strong words on this subject.
I am curious if you have any insights into how "regular people" look at this. A jury of Chainlinkers would obviously agree with your sentiment, but I can imagine that jurors who don't cycle might find it hard not to put themselves in the position of the driver. Hitting and killing someone you didn't see is something of a "worst-possible scenario" for a lot of drivers, I imagine, and I would guess they'd tend to sympathize with the defense of "I looked and I didn't see him."
Brendan Kevenides said:Looking and failing to see what should be seen is no defense. It is an indictment.
Another death due to turning vehicle, this time in Indy.
262 members
203 members
269 members
63 members
172 members