JackMcKee

Follow

Comment history

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

distracted/inattentive driving is an infraction. The LEO determined that the driver was following all laws. Take it up with him/her.

February 7, 2013 at 3:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

I can't take credit for 500 years of jurisprudence.

February 7, 2013 at 3:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

I think our laws are our best effort at morality. Humans are imperfect, therefore so are our creations.

February 7, 2013 at 3:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

The driver didn't intentionally hit the pedestrian. The driver was also following all laws, regulations and ordinances when the accident happened. The pedestrian was the only one that failed to follow the law. When she decided to cross 23rd street in an unsafe manner she took the risk that someone might hit her. She assumed the risk. If the driver was intoxicated, speeding, texting, or breaking any other law the analysis would be different. There is simply no evidence of any of those factors playing a role.

I'm not sure I can give you a simpler explanation than this.

February 7, 2013 at 3:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

The driver wasn't careless. The LEO on the scene made that determination. I trust his/her judgement far more than an internet jockey.

February 7, 2013 at 3:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

I was wrong. It's now hit a new lowest low.

February 7, 2013 at 3:02 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

good lord. This discussion has hit a new low.

February 7, 2013 at 2:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

Drivers are held to a much higher standard of care.

February 7, 2013 at 2:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

Why do some of you have such a difficult time understanding simple legal concepts. Negligence is a tort that by definition lacks intent. If there is intent it is assault and an entirely different set of rules governs liability.

February 7, 2013 at 2:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Woman injured after being struck by vehicle on 23rd Street

That's not negligence. That's intentional. If you accidentally run into my car and dent it, the person parked illegally is the presumed negligent party. With all the time you wasted in this thread you could have read an entire torts 1 book and understood these things.

February 7, 2013 at 2:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous

loading...