Skateboarders on public roads

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:15 am

I offer the following news itemThe skateboarder was not hurt and he was not arrested, but Dally says his parents were notified and that detectives are investigating.

Elderly Woman Dies After Being Hit by Skateboarder - News Story - KRCR Redding

Police said a large panel truck had stopped for her. As she stepped out from in front of the truck into the bike lane, a 17-year-old boy on a skateboard slammed into her

Man Mourns Wife Killed In Skateboard Collision - News Story - KTVU San Francisco

Would the skateboarder have been arrested and charged had he been on a pushbike and jumped past a stationery truck at a marked crosswalk? Or on a motor bike? Is there a reasonable difference?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:06 am

I wouldn't be surprised if public outcry causes some sort of charge to be filed and expansion of skateboarding laws. The only skateboard ordinance I've ever heard of is prevention of sidewalk skateboarding. The fact that the kid was in the bike lane would cause me to think that the laws governing bike lane behavior would kick in. He probably meant no harm and is most likely very, very sorry for the accident.

Is it reasonable for a 17 year old to understand traffic law enough to be subject to it? Does the kid have a drivers license or driving permit? If so then perhaps he should have known better.

Tough one.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:20 am

Go on, keep talking, I'm much puzzled by this. Does the skateboarder understand the function of a marked crosswalk, for example? As a pedestrian he presumably knows he has right of way when walking across it. So how can he overtake on one? Where's the ambiguity?Traffic was backed up from the hill toward the village, and a box truck was stopped at a crosswalk for Slettehaugh, who was crossing the street toward the ocean, Dally said.

The skateboarder rolled through a stop sign at Cliff Drive and Wharf Road at 15 to 20 mph and passed several cars

Woman dies after skateboard collision in Capitola - Santa Cruz Sentinel

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 11:00 am

Very few, if any towns have laws that specifically govern skateboard in traffic environments.

I don't think they have ever considered skateboards as a mode of transportation.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 11:15 am

This isn't a traffic incident, this is reckless manslaughter (if those words exist in your legal code).

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:44 pm

He's a kid who was wrapped up in his thoughts and listening to music - I'd be surprised if he hasn't learned a hard lesson by this very unfortunate accident.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:48 pm

Had he been doing it in his bedroom I'd have every sympathy. Where he did it was in a place which practically guaranteed someone would eventually die as a result.

Do you seriously regard this as a mere accident as opposed to reckless behavior?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:52 pm

I can appreciate that, but it's not like it's epidemic. Thinking of all the people who skateboard everyday, this is the first accident of this magnitude I've heard of. Not that it's definitely the only one that occurred, but I'd say we're not out of control as far as deaths due to skateboarding go.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:13 pm

Ahso!;1362408 wrote: I can appreciate that, but it's not like it's epidemic. Thinking of all the people who skateboard everyday, this is the first accident of this magnitude I've heard of. Not that it's definitely the only one that occurred, but I'd say we're not out of control as far as deaths due to skateboarding go.

Good lord.

Look. Woman, 83, dies after being struck by skateboarder – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs

Do you see the photograph of the lady with the straw hat? She was called Maryann Slettehaugh. She was crossing a road at a marked crosswalk. She died because someone in a bike lane on which she had right of way ran into her because he was overtaking stationary traffic.

I did ask in the opening post whether it made any difference that he was on a skateboard instead of, for example, a push-bike or a motorbike. She could have been hit by a runaway cow, she'd have been just as dead.

Had it been the driver of a car, he'd be in jail facing a prison term. Had he been on a motorbike or a push-bike I think he'd be in the same place. Anyone at all causing that death was behaving recklessly, that's the crux of my point. Is recklessness not a crime in Santa Cruz when it results in a death?

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:18 pm

spot;1362401 wrote: This isn't a traffic incident, this is reckless manslaughter (if those words exist in your legal code).

I agree. The kid should have been paying better attention, probably.

but to your question in the OP:

Would the skateboarder have been arrested and charged had he been on a pushbike and jumped past a stationery truck at a marked crosswalk? Or on a motor bike? Is there a reasonable difference?

There are no laws specific to skateboarding in traffic situations, in most places.

A bicyclist would have been explicitly covered. A motorized bike, probably as well.

These are normal conveyances.

On the other hand, callous as it may sound, the woman probably should have peaked around the van before proceeding, since she was about to step into and across a bicycle lane.

Would this conversation be taking place if a biker had whacked her, instead of a skateboarder?

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:23 pm

And, according to the article, Booth said municipal code prohibits skateboarding the Capitola Village commercial district where the accident occurred and the teen was cited for a violation.

So now the police need to determine whether to charge the kid for manslaughter, or to let him go on with his life, understanding all too well how a moment of poor judgement can cost lives.

I hope he has learned the lesson.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:34 pm

What can I say, Spot. Two people bumped into one another and the fittest of the two survived the encounter. I feel for the family and friends who are experiencing the loss, but loss is a fact of life. It was a freaking accident for god's sake.

I'm not in favor of locking up kids for being kids.

Are you hoping to see skateboards classified similar to bicycles? Maybe they should be.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 2:08 pm

LarsMac;1362411 wrote: Would this conversation be taking place if a biker had whacked her, instead of a skateboarder?

If a biker had whacked her and everyone was just oh these things happen, he didn't mean to? Damn right it would. Or a car driver. Or someone dropping grenades randomly along the street. It's nothing to do with skateboards or bikes or cars or grenades, it's everything to do with reckless disregard for the safety of others.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 2:31 pm

I think you're right, Spot. I think the manufacturer of the thing the kid was listening to is at fault for selling the thing without the technology to interrupt the music and say "someone's grandmother is crossing the street in front of you". I also think the truck manufacturer is at fault for the truck not automatically honking when a person crosses in front of it. Come to think of it, the crosswalk paint should blink shocking pink when people step on it. And the skateboard, don't get me started on that.

Oh yea, the kid - he should have been born with DNA that had all of life's experiences already encoded in it too. Screw this growing up bit, we've advanced past that. Well at least everyone but this kid has, that is.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 2:55 pm

What you're saying is that a woman of 83 has no right or access to a safe environment because there's no legal obligation on road users to ensure one for her, and that consequently she takes her life in her hands every day she visits her friends at the beach.

The only thing that went wrong was the reckless behavior of the skateboarder, it's nothing to do with trucks or mp3 players or the visibility of crosswalks. Do you actually know what reckless means? It refers to someone who could be aware of the danger but chooses to be ignorant because he thinks it's too trivial for him to bother his pretty little head about. To reck - to have care, concern, or regard, to take heed. To be reckless, to fail in those regards. It's a choice. To behave in a reckless manner and consequently cause death is either a crime where you live or it's not. It's most certainly illegal here in Bristol. The killer was a complete gimboid. If his attitude is anything like yours then he still is one and he's still as much a danger to the community as he was when he totalled the pensioner.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 3:28 pm

What I'm saying is a 17 year old behaved as many if not most 17 year olds do and unfortunately caused a terrible accident resulting in the death of an elderly woman. Should he have been riding the skateboard in the road? No. But he did. I'd hope this young man is now aware of why rules exist. I think it would be good if he got to know the family of the victim, spent time doing community service and took it upon himself to become a caring individual (which he may already be, incidentally).

Should the victim's family be compensated somehow? I don't know it that's possible because I don't know the financial wellbeing of the family of the young man. Should he go to jail? I doubt I'd think he should.

Should skateboards be outlawed? I don't know. Should skateboarders be required to carry insurance? I don't know.

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:26 pm

There is, I think, a valid test in law which bears on this event. Would a reasonable person regard the overtaking of stationary traffic queued at a marked crosswalk as potentially dangerous, or not? Because if an averagely reasonable person might think it inherently safe then the result on this occasion was an accident. That, I think, is what accident means in a legal context. If this theoretical person might think instead that it would be inherently dangerous, then the result on this occasion wasn't an accident, it was a consequence of reckless behavior.

I'll even allow you to substitute "reasonable teenager", if you prefer.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:51 pm

Neither of us knows what happened, he may have been distracted, he may have had a brain fart, or he may be an ass.

Regardless of how either you or I try to frame what happened and why, the best way to honor this lady's death would be for this young man to be a conscientious individual from here on out. He may even go on a crusade to preach skateboarding safety on youtube and in schools and start a movement. Who knows.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:01 pm

One other thing. He should be guided to accept responsibility for his actions.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:33 pm

Yes, it was a tragic accident.

As for the safety of the crosswalk, there are laws in many stats that state a vehicle operator must yield right-of-way to a pedestrian in a cross-walk.

That does not guarantee the pedestrian absolute safety. Bicycles are not specifically included as vehicles in those laws, and so it is logical to conclude that skateboards are also not included.

The kid was behaving stupidly. He should feel terrible. Should we ruin his life because of a moment of stupidity?

What do you think should happen, here, Spot?

The kid screwed up. He should be punished. I am sure that the city will think of something properly dreadful.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:34 am

You're telling me a bicycle lane can have a marked crosswalk on it but that bicyclists have priority over pedestrians at that point regardless of the markings? I find that hard to believe. The "marked crosswalk" was introduced originally in England, by a Minister for Transport called Hore-Belisha; I could look up the legislation and I bet you it covers all road users, not just motorised ones.

LarsMac;1362433 wrote: The kid was behaving stupidly. He should feel terrible. Should we ruin his life because of a moment of stupidity?

What do you think should happen, here, Spot?

I think the matter should be within the discretion of the victim's family, in particular the victim's husband George Slettehaugh to whom she had been married for 64 years. The state is responsible for deciding whether the evidence constitutes a reckless killing, which I think it does. In my opinion there should be a single sentencing option available to a judge in such a case, and the power of clemency should be entirely in the hands of those personally affected by the death - in this case, George Slettehaugh. Forgiveness is not within the competence of the judicial system.

The question comes down to asking what an acceptable all-purpose single sentence, before any consideration of clemency, ought to be for reckless killing.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:43 am

The lady was in a crosswalk, and had the right of way. The skateboarder should have given way to her-it should be classified under "reckless killing" since it wasn't a vehicular manslaughter.

Bike lanes here have right of way over motorists, crosswalks over everyone. Even the jaywalker has priority, although an infringement technically of the law. Anything that has movement and is on a public roadway, has a responsibility to be aware of other persons and travel conveyances.

As a minor, I think that will eventually be considered by a judge-I would think he will be charged eventually.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:50 am

Is that how you folks over there in the UK do it? My first reaction is to disagree, though I'd listen to what your all-purpose single sentence would be.

There are too many highly sensitive people out there as well as others who may tend to think vindictively, especially so close to the time of their loss.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 7:23 am

I haven't the slightest vindictive feeling toward the lad. If the law didn't penalize reckless killings then lots of people would kill recklessly and consider it perfectly normal behavior, with the deaths being purely accidental consequences for which they held no blame. That seems to be a fair paraphrase of your interpretation of what happened, incidentally.

I have no preference whatever for the single sentence so long as it conveys to society that reckless killing is not permitted, the sentence can be a fixed percentage of the perpetrator's capital (as in "half your worldly goods") or statutory community service or imprisonment for life without parole for all I care so long as it's applied equally to both lowlife scum and blond Aryan straight-A students. Whatever the single sentence is, I don't see the least reason why it should differ depending on whether or not a motorized vehicle was used as the blunt instrument.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 7:31 am

We were talking about this last night.

My sister-in-law, who is 82 thought that it would have been much worse for the victim to have been a younger person, like a mother of young children or something like that.

She thought that to get taken out by a skateboarder would be a lot better than what usually happens to people of such an age.

I tend to agree after spending a year watching my 81 year old mother die a slow death.

Having said that, we believe that the boy should be required to attend the funeral and face her family.

Whatever the state could come up with after that would be rather mild.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 7:42 am

I think you're jumping to conclusions a bit quickly. You act as though the kid did this purposely - I'd prefer to wait an see what the skateboarder has to say.

I'm of the opinion that society has already gotten the message reckless killing is not permitted.

But this kid may one day become president of the U.S. and go around recklessly killing others via illegal wars, right?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 8:08 am

chonsigirl;1362442 wrote: The lady was in a crosswalk, and had the right of way. The skateboarder should have given way to her-it should be classified under "reckless killing" since it wasn't a vehicular manslaughter.

Bike lanes here have right of way over motorists, crosswalks over everyone. Even the jaywalker has priority, although an infringement technically of the law. Anything that has movement and is on a public roadway, has a responsibility to be aware of other persons and travel conveyances.

As a minor, I think that will eventually be considered by a judge-I would think he will be charged eventually.Thanks for the clarification. I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that the kid is at fault here. Although he was reckless, I'm saying there was no malice on anyones part as I see it so far. It was a very unfortunate event that occurred because a young person used poor judgment, and young people are prone to poor judgment more frequently on average than are more mature, experienced folks.

Let's not forget that this young person has to live with himself for the remainder of his life. Chances are this memory will never fade.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 8:41 am

If the lady was hidden by the van parked on the road maybe the skateboarder couldn't see that a pedestrian had entered the crosswalk. To ask that all vehicles, bikes , skateboarders, unicyclers, in line skaters etc etc stop at every crosswalk that a van happens to be stopped at then traffic will never go anywhere. These two happen to meet at the exact same place at the exact same time and an accident occurred. May the woman rest in peace and the teen grow to a responsible and caring adult. You cant protect against every single possible accident that may or may not result in injury or death.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:33 am

Ahso!;1362447 wrote: I think you're jumping to conclusions a bit quickly. You act as though the kid did this purposely - I'd prefer to wait an see what the skateboarder has to say.

I'm of the opinion that society has already gotten the message reckless killing is not permitted.

But this kid may one day become president of the U.S. and go around recklessly killing others via illegal wars, right?

It's shed a whole new light on "collateral damage" - we didn't intend those people to die so we're still clean and innocent.

I've not seen anyone suggest he did it deliberately, I certainly don't think he did. I think he behaved recklessly as to the consequences, and that his behavior was inherently dangerous.

Tell me, if he'd been a black urban gang member or an "illegal alien" rather than a white potential college student, would the reaction have been different?

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:42 am

spot;1362454 wrote: It's shed a whole new light on "collateral damage" - we didn't intend those people to die so we're still clean and innocent.

I've not seen anyone suggest he did it deliberately, I certainly don't think he did. I think he behaved recklessly as to the consequences, and that his behavior was inherently dangerous.

Tell me, if he'd been a black urban gang member or an "illegal alien" rather than a white potential college student, would the reaction have been different?

I think you are overreacting, Spot.

Nobody says the kid is "clean and innocent"

He was charged with violating the ordinance against skateboards in the area.

The police are investigating the incident. They will likely charge him with something more serious, and the family will have the opportunity to file civil charges of wrongful death and such.

The kid's life is going to suck for the next year or so no matter how things turn out.

It ain't over yet. Would you feel better if the cops had just shot the kid at the scene?

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:51 am

LarsMac;1362457 wrote: It ain't over yet. Would you feel better if the cops had just shot the kid at the scene?
That, surely, only happens to unarmed blacks, not to frat boys. I'm not sure what a frat boy is to be honest, but I presume this lad was on the way to becoming one.

Surely no police blow away unarmed black kids any mo, I hear you cry?

Let me remind myself. It's obscure, it's not hit the national press as far as I can see but at least it's contemporary assuming Memorial Day was recent.

What did I see when I read this. I saw unarmed but "hey, we found a gun in the car three days later" as if police never looked earlier and had no history of planting firearms on cop-shot blacks. I saw "a total of five officers were almost struck by this individual" but no, sorry, we can't show any footage as proof, just trust us, we're the police. And I saw oh whoopsie we deliberately destroyed bystander videos of what really took place.

Raymond Herisse ID’ed as man shot by Miami Beach police on Memorial day weekend

You guys really do live in a strange country.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:25 pm

There's no question our country has a lot to fix and get right, but we keep trying and most of us don't turn our back and walk away either. We're still here.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 1:31 pm

spot;1362454 wrote: It's shed a whole new light on "collateral damage" - we didn't intend those people to die so we're still clean and innocent.

I've not seen anyone suggest he did it deliberately, I certainly don't think he did. I think he behaved recklessly as to the consequences, and that his behavior was inherently dangerous.

Tell me, if he'd been a black urban gang member or an "illegal alien" rather than a white potential college student, would the reaction have been different?I figured this was where we were headed. So the majority of Americans are unaware of the injustices of their political and business leaders, and it's especially bothersome they seem to prefer it that way, but that's the nature of the majority of the species. I doubt it's much different where you live.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 2:05 pm

spot;1362459 wrote: That, surely, only happens to unarmed blacks, not to frat boys. I'm not sure what a frat boy is to be honest, but I presume this lad was on the way to becoming one.

Surely no police blow away unarmed black kids any mo, I hear you cry?

Let me remind myself. It's obscure, it's not hit the national press as far as I can see but at least it's contemporary assuming Memorial Day was recent.

What did I see when I read this. I saw unarmed but "hey, we found a gun in the car three days later" as if police never looked earlier and had no history of planting firearms on cop-shot blacks. I saw "a total of five officers were almost struck by this individual" but no, sorry, we can't show any footage as proof, just trust us, we're the police. And I saw oh whoopsie we deliberately destroyed bystander videos of what really took place.

Raymond Herisse ID’ed as man shot by Miami Beach police on Memorial day weekend

You guys really do live in a strange country.

Well true enough, but regarding your "unarmed black kid"

One killed, seven injured during police-involved shootings on South Beach - Miami Beach - MiamiHerald.com

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 2:10 pm

So the majority of Americans are unaware of the injustices of their political and business leaders, and it's especially bothersome they seem to prefer it that way, but that's the nature of the majority of the species. I doubt it's much different where you live. On the contrary, England's great and good have taken remarkable steps to root out institutional racism. We've had public inquiries, sackings, we're good at it. In particular we repeal laws which have disproportionate effects on groups from different ethnic heritages and we monitor and publicize the behavior our police and the courts.

How about a bit more of the background to the Miami shooting last month?Starting in 2007 the police arrested Raymond 13 times for a series of non-violent crimes such as: loitering, driving without a license, failure to appear in court, and giving a false name to an officer. The most serious charge was in February 2010 for the possession of small amounts of cocaine and hydrocodone, which might have been planted on his person. For this, he was held briefly in the county jail. Even so, Raymond has been painted in the press as having “a lengthy criminal record -- including prison time.”

Miami Police Assassinate Character of Haitian Youth After Taking His Life | Crime and Punishment |Axisoflogic.com

In the UK we'd be down on any police force which pulled this sort of stunt like a ton of bricks, it would be the story of the decade.

regarding your "unarmed black kid" [...] One killed, seven injured Do you seriously think those injuries weren't all caused by police bullets?

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:14 pm

My gramp always told me, there are at least three sides to every story, and often none of them get too close to the truth.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 4:36 am

We can throw ATV cops are fired; 1 linked to shooting - Miami Beach - MiamiHerald.com into the mix as relevant to the Miami story, and return to it in years to come the way we do to the police deathsquad in New Orleans that was protected for years by their bosses. Why can't cardboard cut-out goons like Police Chief Carlos Noriega realize that calling a spade a spade, and withdrawing support from power-dulled cops who kill, and cooperating with a policy of prosecuting such cops, actually improves the image of their force? At the very least, mate, stop believing your own excuses and your colleagues' lies - acknowledge you have an Augean stable and get it cleaned up.

And Mayor Matti Bower?Mayor Matti Bower said the recent string of controversies surrounding the city’s police department should not deter the 10 million annual tourists from continuing to visit. “It is very important to us and the city of Miami Beach to act swiftly,” Bower said. “We want to continue to have citizens and visitors realize that we take action when action is needed.”How easy does it get, Matti. Prosecute those on your police force who go wild. Stop defending the bastards.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 6:49 am

So we have now turned a incident of young skateboarding murderer into a a thread about police brutality and racism.

Interesting.

And, BTW, most of the police officers involved in the shooting were NOT Miami Beach Police.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:01 am

I never called the skateboarder a murderer, I said his action seemed an instance of reckless killing and that he's not being treated as a black teenager would have been in his position (either by the authorities or in this thread) because he's not a black teenager and the US still has institutional racism bred into its backbone, something the posters here all appear to take for granted. The thread's coherent, it's about racism and the Miami fiasco is central to my point.

Peg · Post by **Peg** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:42 am

Did I miss something here? I saw no mention of his race in the articles. Either way, makes no difference to me. Just because he was not immediately arrested, does not mean the prosecutor will not file charges.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:44 am

Perhaps it takes an outsider to read between the lines, Peg.

Should any charges be brought, I'll add them to the thread.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:44 am

There are five people who have participated in this thread - me; you; LarsMac; YZGI: and Chonsi. Which one of us are you accusing, without any good reason I might add, of what you've said above, Spot? Speaking for myself, I treat everyone the same, and I have yet to read anything by any of the other three that would lead me to think they wouldn't either.

The only one transparent enough to be accurately predictable regarding prejudices is you.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:55 am

You're denying race is a consideration on the part of many individual police officers in the USA? And that their prejudice is condoned by their senior officers? You're deliberately burying your head in the sand. And I did ask earlier whether the posters would have a different attitude if it was a black street punk, and nobody felt able to post an outright denial.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:31 am

spot;1362483 wrote: You're denying race is a consideration on the part of many individual police officers in the USA? And that their prejudice is condoned by their senior officers? You're deliberately burying your head in the sand. And I did ask earlier whether the posters would have a different attitude if it was a black street punk, and nobody felt able to post an outright denial.

does a kid have to be black to be a street punk?

Besides that, look at the behavior of the kid in question.

The skateboard kid,

1. tried to avoid the collision, at risk of injury according to witnesses.

2. stayed at the scene of the accident, and tried to lend comfort and assistance.

3. stayed after the police arrived, and cooperated with the investigation.

A punk, no matter what color, would probably have done none of those things, whether on skateboard, bicycle, or in a car.

As for your race thing. I would never deny race is a factor in behavior of police officers, or anyone else, sometimes.

Do you know what race the police officers involved in the shooting at South Beach were?

If it was 4 AM and a car is barreling towards you at high speed, and other officers are shooting at it, do you think you would stop to notice what color the driver was before taking action?

I suggest that you know almost nothing of either incident, and that you probably know even less of the racial climate in America, much less in Miami.

On the latter, I have been in the middle of it my entire life, and would suggest that I am far more familiar with it than you will ever be.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:38 am

spot;1362483 wrote: You're denying race is a consideration on the part of many individual police officers in the USA? And that their prejudice is condoned by their senior officers? You're deliberately burying your head in the sand. And I did ask earlier whether the posters would have a different attitude if it was a black street punk, and nobody felt able to post an outright denial.Who are you and how did you hijack Spot's account?

i don't need to make an accounting of myself to you or Spot if i choose not to. The fact that that causes you to jump to conclusions as you have convince me you are not Spot.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:54 am

.

This was a freak accident.

We are taught from the time we are toddlers to look both ways before crossing the street. We are taught from the time we are learning to drive to yield to pedestrians.

Down in the newer town that my daughter lives in, the bike/runner paths are clearly marked with traffic signs facing the rider. There are path stop signs at all road intersections and yields at all sidewalk intersections. At the few bike paths in my town, nothing is marked.

Perhaps the safest solution would be to have crossing bars fall across the road, much like the bars the come out from the side of our local school buses when children are crossing the street?

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:11 am

flopstock;1362487 wrote: .

This was a freak accident.

We are taught from the time we are toddlers to look both ways before crossing the street. We are taught from the time we are learning to drive to yield to pedestrians.

Down in the newer town that my daughter lives in, the bike/runner paths are clearly marked with traffic signs facing the rider. There are path stop signs at all road intersections and yields at all sidewalk intersections. At the few bike paths in my town, nothing is marked.

Perhaps the safest solution would be to have crossing bars fall across the road, much like the bars the come out from the side of our local school buses when children are crossing the street?

What color would the bars be?

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:15 am

spot;1362483 wrote: You're denying race is a consideration on the part of many individual police officers in the USA? And that their prejudice is condoned by their senior officers? You're deliberately burying your head in the sand. And I did ask earlier whether the posters would have a different attitude if it was a black street punk, and nobody felt able to post an outright denial.

If it were a black, brown, yellow, red or white street punk who had an "ACCIDENT" it would still be an "ACCIDENT" not necessarily a criminal action.

I'm happy to hear that the UK has completely erased any and all racism out of their society. (cough) (cough). We will strive for your perfection in the future.

Post by **spot** » Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:58 am

I had a discussion with a solicitor on Sunday and brought up this thread. In England at least, the fact that the death was accidental is only partially relevant when considering whether it was a criminal death; deliberate deaths have a different set of tests to decide whether they're legal or not.

What matters in considering an accidental death is whether the death resulted from a chain of events directly triggered by something the defendant did. If the defendant was originally engaged in a crime then that, already, is enough to convict - any death during the performance of a crime is absolutely a criminal death regardless of intention.

If there was no initial criminality then the test continues with whether the defendant triggering that chain was reckless when performing his action (whether he personally foresaw the consequence or not is immaterial) in that a hypothetical reasonable person in that circumstance could have foreseen the possible consequence and should therefore have desisted in the action.

I don't for a minute believe matters are as different in the US as is being made out here. Yes it was an accident, yes it was also a criminal death. It was a criminal death firstly because it was triggered during an already illegal act, and secondly because regardless of the illegal act the remainder of the test would be satisfied anyway.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:08 am

Spot, what would you suggest as this criminals punishment?