Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 80

Thread: Bicyclist hit at Duke and W Taylor Run, Alexandria

  1. #51
    KLizotte's Avatar
    KLizotte is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Arlington, VA by way of MA and London, UK
    Posts
    3,639
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    At a minimum, the driver should have her license permanently revoked. Obviously unfit to drive.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    94
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I can't recall instances of license revocation which didn't involve DUI.

  3. Likes ginacico liked this post
  4. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    420
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fairlington124 View Post
    My understanding is that the motorist was elderly, and I know that prosecutors tend to not press charges against the elderly for driving errors, perhaps out of sympathy for degrading driving skills. This could have factored in as well.
    If this was the reasoning, then shouldn't the driver, at a minimum, been required to re-take the driving test? How can the prosecutor sleep knowing that people with bad driving skills may be out on the road possibly killing people - and he did nothing about the ones that he knew about. I don't buy the reason of "she would need the transportation" (I have seen this as a "reason" for many people being allowed to keep licenses) so we cannot remove her driving privileges. Perhaps this was not the norm for the driver, but a test should show that - if you cannot do it correctly during the test, it is unlikely you can do it correctly at other times. If you pass the test, you might still not regularly drive safely, but theoretically, you know how to do so.

  5. #54
    mstone is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,911
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scoot View Post
    The cagey language employed by the prosecutor in the article suggests that the driver was found at fault, but that the evidence is not strong enough to support a charge of criminal negligence. How could the evidence not be clear-cut? Perhaps witness statements conflicted each other?
    Too lazy to take a case that isn't a slam dunk. We need prosecutors willing to push, then we have cases to take to the legislature. Instead we have prosecutors who won't even bother, and a legislature that refuses to change anything and points to a lack of cases showing that the current laws are a problem.

  6. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    194
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    So apparently, there was a witness who gave a statement. He said that the woman driving her car ran the red light and sent Ryan flying 50 feet. That doesn't matter, I guess.

  7. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    94
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    From the statement:
    The investigation revealed that the 80-year old driver of the motor vehicle was properly licensed and remained at the scene of the accident. Furthermore, there was no evidence that she was intoxicated and she has cooperated fully with the investigators.
    Curious how nothing was said about the actual act of striking the cyclist. It also makes me wonder if the motorist was doing something patently illegal or incorrect, the previous poster suggested running a red light.

    The prosecutor talks a lot about what the motorist didn't do, not nearly as much as what she did.

  8. Likes dasgeh liked this post
  9. #57
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    194
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fairlington124 View Post
    From the statement:

    Curious how nothing was said about the actual act of striking the cyclist. It also makes me wonder if the motorist was doing something patently illegal or incorrect, the previous poster suggested running a red light.

    The prosecutor talks a lot about what the motorist didn't do, not nearly as much as what she did.
    Ryan is a friend of a friend. According to our mutual acquaintance, Ryan rode very much by the book and would not have crossed against the light at that intersection. Frankly, you'd have to be insane to even try, knowing the conditions on that part of Duke Street.

    The authorities really dropped the ball on this one.

  10. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    392
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fairlington124 View Post
    I can't recall instances of license revocation which didn't involve DUI.
    I can't recall an instance of license revocation, PERIOD. In Baltimore, the woman who killed Tom Palermo (a friend) will be free to drive with an interlock device when she's done with her sentence. If her offenses (multiple) weren't egregious enough, what is?

    Quote Originally Posted by scorchedearth View Post
    The authorities really dropped the ball on this one.
    My sympathies.

  11. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Alexandria
    Posts
    61
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Observations

    I observed this intersection the other day for about 45 minutes during rush hour. The crossing signal is completely separated from traffic. This means that for about 30 seconds, no cars are supposed to move while a person walks across. I find it very unlikely that Brown would have crossed against the walk signal because there is no gap in traffic during rush hour without it. There is an east-west signal phase on Duke and then a phase for Taylor Run drives to turn left and right. Each time, eastbound Duke past the light is completely full of cars.
    In this clip, walk signal comes on at the 8 second mark. If I was walking across at that point, I would have been hit by the red Chevy. Here are the rest of the videos and a few pictures I took.

  12. ELITE Steve O, KLizotte, scorchedearth ELITED this post
  13. #60
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    194
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zack View Post
    I observed this intersection the other day for about 45 minutes during rush hour. The crossing signal is completely separated from traffic. This means that for about 30 seconds, no cars are supposed to move while a person walks across. I find it very unlikely that Brown would have crossed against the walk signal because there is no gap in traffic during rush hour without it. There is an east-west signal phase on Duke and then a phase for Taylor Run drives to turn left and right. Each time, eastbound Duke past the light is completely full of cars.
    In this clip, walk signal comes on at the 8 second mark. If I was walking across at that point, I would have been hit by the red Chevy. Here are the rest of the videos and a few pictures I took.
    Interestingly enough, the police claimed that the functioning of the intersection did not contribute to the crash. It sounds like you can refute that fairly easily based on your observations.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •