Disclaimer Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 Jury explains why they found drunken driver with suspended license not guilty in fatal crashhttp://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2010/07/jury_explains_why_they_found_d.htmlSummary: Guy with trace THC (weed) levels, plus BAC of 0.09, plus suspended license found not guilty of killing motorcyclist by turning in front of him because motorcyclist "caused his own demise" by speeding.And, discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El capitan Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 michigan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 Sounds like the jury was a true jury of the defendant's peers. I'd bet none of them ride a motorcycle or if they do they ride cruisers. Impaired, at night it is very difficult to judge distance and speed. The accident would have happened even if the motorcyclist had been going 20 MPH slower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyler524 Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 75mph or not the guy was drunk and had a suspended license meaning he should have never been on the road to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natedogg624 Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 Sounds like the jury was a true jury of the defendant's peers. I'd bet none of them ride a motorcycle or if they do they ride cruisers. Impaired, at night it is very difficult to judge distance and speed. The accident would have happened even if the motorcyclist had been going 20 MPH slower.there may have been pre trial, but the lawyer threw them out with the "questioning" pre-jurors go through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevysoldier Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 Okay, here's my thoughts. The guy had traces of THC and a BAC of .09. That is hard evidence. To guess the motorcyclists speed after a wreck is not an exact science and cannot be determined exactly. The guy had a suspended license and should not have been there in the first place. He'll be right back out on the road again.This is one reason I avoid driving and never ride the bike at 2am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 errr... I avoid driving downtown in Grand Rapids at 2am...Been pretty successful so far with that.The rider rode with the Grand Rapids Ruff Ryders.That might have come out in the trial.A group of sport bikes that ride wearing matching camo."Loved by few, hated by many, respected by all."Just a social group, but 10+ chapters around.http://www.grandrapidsruffryders.com/http://www.facebook.com/grandrapids.ruffryders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSVDon Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 Another reason to hate Michigan. Grand Rapids is filled with a bunch of Dutch yuppies that are about as bad as the people in Ann Arbor. I'm definitely sure they're more worried about people speeding than someone who violated three distinct laws at one time.Fuck Michigan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZIXXER9R Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 This Just angers me, yes we take chances everytime we strap on the helmet but every single one of us has speed on our bikes but this stupid piece of shit had no legal right to be on the road in the first place, he will get his in the end, shotin drug deal or kills himself or someone else again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BonkerS Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 Everyone knows America's legal system is a joke...nothing new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cg2112 Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 Sounds like the jury was a true jury of the defendant's peers. I'd bet none of them ride a motorcycle or if they do they ride cruisers. Impaired, at night it is very difficult to judge distance and speed. The accident would have happened even if the motorcyclist had been going 20 MPH slower.Ugh. People who ride cruisers are total dicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 Ugh. People who ride cruisers are total dicks.Exactly my point, plus they have very little knowledge about motorcycling except that they are supposed to stop at the next bar when they go out slowly riding around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 26, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 This must continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeedTriple44444 Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 Exactly my point, plus they have very little knowledge about motorcycling except that they are supposed to stop at the next bar when they go out slowly riding around.Only true when you're talking about the majority of non-metric cruiser riders. This article is proof yet again that motorcyclists don't have the same rights and protections under the law as car drivers / passengers. I always say, if you want to kill someone, run them down on their motorcycle, take the slap on the wrist, and you can literally get away with murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdubyah Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 RIP rider Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 the article doesn't say what they charged the driver with as far as the rider's death. It could have been anything from reckless endangerment to vehicular homicide, to voluntary manslaughter. If the prosecution went for a heavy charge that they couldn't back up, it's very possible that the jury made the RIGHT decision.You're not going to get an argument from me that it's wrong to be driving under suspension and while drunk, but say I'm wasted and driving under suspension and stopped at a red light, and a rider plows into the back of my car; am I responsible?it sounds like that's essentially what happened here. The driver made a legal left-hand turn. The collision wouldn't have occurred if the rider hadn't been speeding excessively. say he wasn't drunk and had a license, but he hadn't been wearing his seat belt. Is the driver still responsible then? He's still breaking the law.Oh, and the civil suit is what's going to get the victim's family $$ anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 it sounds like that's essentially what happened here. The driver made a legal left-hand turn. The collision wouldn't have occurred if the rider hadn't been speeding excessively. say he wasn't drunk and had a license, but he hadn't been wearing his seat belt. Is the driver still responsible then? He's still breaking the law.i was under the impression that it does not matter if oncoming traffic is going 10 mph or 100 mph. you still have to yield to them before making your left? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 26, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 I don't know the Michigan code, but ORC 4511.42:4511.42 Right-of-way rule when turning left.(A) The operator of a vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley intending to turn to the left within an intersection or into an alley, private road, or driveway shall yield the right of way to any vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley approaching from the opposite direction, whenever the approaching vehicle, streetcar, or trackless trolley is within the intersection or so close to the intersection, alley, private road, or driveway as to constitute an immediate hazard.(B) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to one predicate motor vehicle or traffic offense, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of two or more predicate motor vehicle or traffic offenses, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree. Effective Date: 01-01-2004@ 75mph you're traveling 110 fps@ 45 mph you're traveling 66fpsHow long does it take to make a left turn? 2-3 seconds? So, the bike would've traveled 200ft @ the speed limit or 330ft @ 75mph (approximately 1 football field)... over the ENTIRE execution of the turnBut during the trial, defense attorney Jeffrey O'Hara challenged the conclusions reached by Grand Rapids Police and worked to convince the jury the spatter pattern from automobile fluids and the damage to the front-end of the 2003 Ford Mustang showed Windom had not pulled in front of Ray....meaning the driver had barely began executing the turn if the cyclist hit the front of the vehicle. So, the guy turned left in front of the bike with less than 200ft between them.Math doesn't lie. The only argument (beyond the fact the guy wasn't even supposed to be on the road to begin with) is if the motorcycle being < 200ft away constitutes "an immediate hazard" -- which is apparently what the courts would have to decide (if it was in Ohio).Oh, and the civil suit is what's going to get the victim's family $$ anyway.Not to judge, but methinks it'll be hard getting blood outta that turnip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollywood3586 Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 damn Justin you should be a lawyer.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 26, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 It's amazing the things you learn and have to research to fight a speeding ticket. I still lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cg2112 Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 Exactly my point, plus they have very little knowledge about motorcycling except that they are supposed to stop at the next bar when they go out slowly riding around.I was being sarcastic. Maybe it's south west Ohio, but every experienced biker I know rides a cruiser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAMBUSA Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 I was being sarcastic. Maybe it's south west Ohio, but every experienced biker I know rides a cruiserSo those of us that ride sport bikes aren't experienced bikers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrillo Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 So those of us that ride sport bikes aren't experienced bikers?No dude.. we're all a bunch a noobs cause none of us live long enough to become experienced/s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 Aaaaannd we're off...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyler524 Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 Were all just a bunch of Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.