IANAL, but I think negligence has a relatively high burden of proof in a legal sense. In everyday language, negligence might seem obvious in a case like this - how can you run into someone _without_ being negligent, after all? But in court there are separate elements to what constitutes negligence, and each of those has to be present in order for the charge to hold up. You can look at some wikipedia articles on negligence in criminal law, but don't blame for any resulting dizziness :)
It should also be noted that the initial citation does not necessarily mean that a DA can't charge otherwise later, if s/he believes there is a reasonable chance of charges holding up in court (or intimidating a suspect into entering a plea deal). >From reading about this stuff on Streetsblog over the years, it seems that if a) you are sober b) don't leave the scene of a collision, and c) don't hit a police officer, it is very unlikely that you will face any serious criminal repercussions for hitting with your vehicle a person on a bike, walking -- or even driving. Harald. On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:39 PM Grant Foster <[email protected]> wrote: > Does anyone on this listserv have better insight into normal citation > practices for traffic collisions? I'm (naively) surprised that this > incident resulted in a citation for *unsafe passing of a > bicyclist--346.075* (penalty of $20-200 for the first offense). Why isn't > this *negligent operation of a vehicle causing bodily harm--346.62 (3)* > (penalty of $300-2,000 and 30-365 days in county jail)? I don't have any > details other than what was published in the article and am not saying the > driver is guilty, but it seems like the laws and penalties are designed to > address different consequences of bad actions. A ticket for $20-200 seems > appropriate if someone is caught passing with less than 3', but doesn't > cause any harm (like the proactive enforcement happening in Chattanooga > http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2015/jun/07/3-feet-or-else/308339/). > But if this negligent behavior (passing a cyclist with less than 3' of > clearance) results in the loss of property or causes harm or death, isn't > the intent to have a greater penalty? I'm not a big fan of incarceration > and would prefer penalties that restrict driving privelages and require > additional training, but $20-200 for running someone off the road (whether > on a bike or in a MV) and landing them in the hospital doesn't quite > compute. Does the same practice occur for MV vs. MV collisions? > > Grant > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Michael Rewey <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Mr. Skindrud never had a lick of sense no matter what side of the aisle >> he sat on. I feel what >> he did was stupid, but not intentional. >> >> >> >> On 10 Jun 2015 at 11:45, ivar moi wrote: >> >> Sue the truck outof him. >> >> >> On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 12:06 AM, William Hauda <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> Give some people the keys to a dump truck and they'll try to kill >> you. I don't believe all Republicans hate bicyclists, but this guy, >> while he may or not be be an exception, is reflecting a prevailing >> attitude amongst legislators antagonistic to bicycling. >> >> http://www.channel3000.com/news/med-flight-responds-to-dump-truck-bicyclist- >> collision/33483812 >> <http://www.channel3000.com/news/med-flight-responds-to-dump-truck-bicyclist-collision/33483812> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bikies mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bikies mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
