Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Discussion with my wife regarding a local crash

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Discussion with my wife regarding a local crash

Old 08-01-22, 08:54 PM
  #26  
jon c. 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,812
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1591 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,015 Times in 570 Posts
You say a great deal about yourself in that post, but I'm not sure what it has to do with cycling.
jon c. is offline  
Likes For jon c.:
Old 08-02-22, 04:58 AM
  #27  
BTinNYC 
...
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Whitestone and Rensselaerville, New York
Posts: 1,459

Bikes: Bicycles? Yup.

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 464 Post(s)
Liked 1,450 Times in 702 Posts
Miss Drunk Murderer just destroyed a family. She will not enjoy her time in the concrete hotel, which is where she belongs.
BTinNYC is offline  
Old 08-02-22, 10:17 AM
  #28  
jack pot 
Fxxxxr
 
jack pot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: falfurrias texas
Posts: 993

Bikes: wabi classic (stolen & recovered)

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2668 Post(s)
Liked 1,144 Times in 869 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent
Wrong is wrong no matter who commits the wrong. These day too many people want to make the wrong doer a victim.

An example of this is some young hoodlum goes out and shoots someone and shoots at the police that return fire and kills him. Then we hear from the parents that failed him. They tell us he was really a wonderful person and was turning him self around. They tell us he was getting his GED and was going to to to college to be a brain surgeon, so the police should never have shot him.
Originally Posted by jon c.
You say a great deal about yourself in that post, but I'm not sure what it has to do with cycling.

well the guy PROBABLY was a bike messenger with a good mind who had a few issues with authorities and was usually strapped because of peer pressure and even tho he was on his 3x GED course he was going to make it this time and since brain surgery was lucrative and because he couldn't run 4.2 or jump out of the gym medicine was his only option out of the projects plus his absent father had probably just paroled and had encouraged him to give up bike messaging because it was a gateway to crime and drugs which all goes to show that bike messengers are always on the brink of self destruction and the cops are always ready to assist
__________________
Nothing is true---everything is permitted
jack pot is offline  
Old 08-02-22, 05:26 PM
  #29  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,853

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1851 Post(s)
Liked 654 Times in 498 Posts
Originally Posted by genec
Another issue that may come into play is that we call collisions "accidents," thus implying a simple no fault mistake rather than what they really are... collisions by drivers failing to maintain their responsibility.


https://www.helpinginjuredpeople.com...experts-argue/
Yes, one thing I learned working wih NHTSA and some university experts in collision type and statistics, is to change to the word "collision." It does not implicitly withhold blame or confer innocence. "Crash" suggests all that matters is that the cars contacted each other or something/someone else, not that there might be reasons which border on the criminal or which seem clearly criminal as well as immoral.

Collision means there was an incident which should be investigated.
Road Fan is offline  
Likes For Road Fan:
Old 08-09-22, 08:56 AM
  #30  
CheGiantForLife
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 287
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked 72 Times in 41 Posts
Originally Posted by aley
has never been in any kind of serious trouble before
she's lost custody of her ten-year-old son. !"
Got it.
CheGiantForLife is offline  
Old 08-09-22, 10:59 AM
  #31  
aley
Goathead Magnet
Thread Starter
 
aley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 673

Bikes: Surly LHT, Cannondale Caffeine F3

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked 11 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by CheGiantForLife
Got it.
In my second post above, I mention that I was mistaken about the custody thing - it turns out that the kid's dad is more or less MIA, and the mom has custody. The kid was with the grandmother at the time of the incident. At any rate, it's not all that relevant to the incident, other than just more victims of the mom's poor decisions.

I was finally able to track down a bit more information about the victims. The cyclist who was hospitalized died of his injuries about two weeks later, so the charge becomes vehicular homicide. I've seen conflicting information on what the difference in possible sentences is - some places say 0-6 years, and some say up to 15 years (with enhancements for prior DWIs, which won't apply in this case). Without getting into too much detail, it sounds like a six-year sentence is likely, though as I understand it (I'm an engineer, not a lawyer, so take anything I saw about the justice system with a BIG grain of salt) in state prison that can be cut essentially in half for good behavior. Seems pretty light for killing an innocent bystander in a hit-and-run DWI, if you ask me.
aley is offline  
Old 08-18-22, 02:57 PM
  #32  
Lostin76
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 31

Bikes: 1977 Colnago Mexico, 1979 Ciocc San Cristobol, 1973 Schwinn Collegiate

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 21 Times in 10 Posts
Car brain really warps people’s thought patterns. It’s all “whoopsie, didn’t see them. So sorry.”
Lostin76 is offline  
Likes For Lostin76:
Old 08-18-22, 03:37 PM
  #33  
M Rose
Full Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: Northeastern Oregon
Posts: 249

Bikes: 2021 Trek Verve 2 Disk

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times in 80 Posts
Originally Posted by dedhed
People don't lose custody of their children in a divorce without very good reasons.
Is being deployed for a year before the divorce a good enough reason to strip a person from having parental time with their children? I lost custody of my children along with all parental rights only because I had been in the military and separated from my kids due to a deployment.
M Rose is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 09:29 AM
  #34  
rydabent
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,054 Times in 634 Posts
Driving drunk, doing a hit and run, and lying about it is more than just a "mistake".
rydabent is offline  
Likes For rydabent:
Old 08-29-22, 10:19 AM
  #35  
UniChris
Senior Member
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked 393 Times in 282 Posts
Originally Posted by greatbasin
While my wife didn't express contempt for cyclists that "get in her way," she did say she wished they didn't ride there because they make it hard for her. That cyclists or anyone else on the road make it harder, however much or little, for motorists is probably objective fact if the motorist is willing to give regard to the cyclist, pedestrian or other motorist. Yes, additional effort is demanded from the motorist to exercise due care.
Something I wish got more attention is that the details of how motorists passing cyclists is actually supposed to work a fairly undefined grey area.

At best, drivers are told what they can't do. But never instructed on what they can.

And what if any social or legal obligation the overtaken cyclist has, is also unclear.

It would in some ways be a drop in the ocean, but I really wish a state DOT would put a page in the manual with a half dozen cartoon diagrams, things like:

"This stretch of road is narrow and curving, so the motorist will have to wait before passing the cyclist"

"Here the road is wider, the cyclist should move over to facilitate passing"

"Here the road is narrow, but though visibility is insufficient to pass another car, in [this state] the driver may legally enter the other lane to pass a cyclist, though that is not permitted in other states"

"Here the road is wide, but there's a garbage can / tree branch / drain gate blocking it, the cyclist can't move over and the motorist must wait"

And potentially (though no one really knows if it's true) "Here the road is narrow, but there are so many vehicles behind the cyclist that they'll need to momentarily stop on the unpaved margin"

There are next to no official statements of these things, so everyone is left to figure it out on their own, and easily gets frustrated with others who refuse to play by their personal interpretation of the rules.

And I don't just mean the utterly bogus interpretations, I mean the wide range of interpretation that are not inconsistent with the actual laws.

Last edited by UniChris; 08-29-22 at 10:25 AM.
UniChris is offline  
Likes For UniChris:
Old 08-29-22, 10:50 AM
  #36  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,600
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18319 Post(s)
Liked 4,487 Times in 3,337 Posts
Originally Posted by UniChris
It would in some ways be a drop in the ocean, but I really wish a state DOT would put a page in the manual with a half dozen cartoon diagrams, things like:
It has been a long time since I've read the Oregon state driver's manual. I know there is also a specific cyclist manual too. But I'm not familiar with the fine details covered.

I agree there needs to be information about multiple road users. And, I would like driving tests to be written so that one can get whatever the passing grade is, 70% or 80%, but there are certain VETO questions, especially pertaining to vulnerable road users. Get those wrong and it is an instant fail.
Originally Posted by UniChris
"Here the road is wide, but there's a garbage can / tree branch / drain gate blocking it, the cyclist can't move over and the motorist must wait"
There certainly is something that riding on road shoulders one has to deal with debris. And, one may choose to ride further to the left than vehicle drivers might wish.

However, if a cyclist changes the lane of travel, they MUST assure it is safe, and even signal to a vehicle behind that they're moving over. This would be especially true when riding in a parking lane and approaching a parked car. Verify it is safe to pass the parked car.

I'd rather garbage cans not be placed where cyclists are riding. Do they place them in the middle of driving lanes?
Originally Posted by UniChris
And potentially (though no one really knows if it's true) "Here the road is narrow, but there are so many vehicles behind the cyclist that they'll need to momentarily stop on the unpaved margin"
How many cars? It is rare that I let more than one or two cars follow me. It often doesn't take much to let them get past. Sometimes one can just slow down in a driveway, and they'll pass by the time on gets across the driveway.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 11:14 AM
  #37  
Juan Foote
LBKA (formerly punkncat)
 
Juan Foote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Jawja
Posts: 4,299

Bikes: Spec Roubaix SL4, GT Traffic 1.0

Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2208 Post(s)
Liked 960 Times in 686 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent
Wrong is wrong no matter who commits the wrong. These day too many people want to make the wrong doer a victim.

An example of this is some young hoodlum goes out and shoots someone and shoots at the police that return fire and kills him. Then we hear from the parents that failed him. They tell us he was really a wonderful person and was turning him self around. They tell us he was getting his GED and was going to to to college to be a brain surgeon, so the police should never have shot him.

This really turns into what should be another posting....

I have never understood the custom of having "nothing bad to say" about a (bad) person after they pass. Suddenly because they have died all the bad deeds and horrible behaviors are washed clean and they are sainted.

I went to a funeral not too long ago of a guy that I shared a common interest with. We shared a lot of time together, along with others on a team together. He was very good at this interest and we had some fun times. All in all though, he was not a particularly good person. He had been in trouble with the law, was prone to fighting and much more. The time came during the service for people to walk up and discuss (good) things about him and for the most part the entire crowd just sort of looked around at each other and the moment passed. Not much to stand up and say in that regard, so no one did.
Juan Foote is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 11:23 AM
  #38  
UniChris
Senior Member
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked 393 Times in 282 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK
There certainly is something that riding on road shoulders one has to deal with debris. And, one may choose to ride further to the left than vehicle drivers might wish.

However, if a cyclist changes the lane of travel, they MUST assure it is safe, and even signal to a vehicle behind that they're moving over. This would be especially true when riding in a parking lane and approaching a parked car. Verify it is safe to pass the parked car.
I think you kind of missed the point of my post, even while having a base agreement on riding mechanics.

The point was that the situational requirements of behavior need to be clearly communicated to both drivers and cyclists - the law is silent on far too much that's practically critical.

So for example for the trash can, I didn't talk about the cyclist moving left, I was using that as a situation to illustrate to a driver why the cyclist could not move right from their current position in order to facilitate the pass.

(That I was discussing the lack of rightward movement rather than the execution of a leftward ones is because a smart cyclist is looking far forward for such things, and not trying to move left at the last instant, plus they're probably riding a bit further out for visibility until there's a car approaching to overtake anyway)

I'd rather garbage cans not be placed where cyclists are riding.
Ideally yes, but that's not a practically realistic expectation, since a shoulder or even the right edge of the lane is often the only level space the arm on the truck can reach. And anyway, if it's not a trash can its a fallen tree branch, or a dead squirrel. Cleaning up (and repairing!) the roads is important, but having a mutual understanding of how cyclists remain safe in the presence of obstacles in an area they could otherwise use is even more important, because it is inescapable that situations will occur.

How many cars? It is rare that I let more than one or two cars follow me. It often doesn't take much to let them get past. Sometimes one can just slow down in a driveway, and they'll pass by the time on gets across the driveway.
Personal strategies are great, the point was that it's hard to find any statement if there's an actual requirement applicable to cyclists

Devising safe strategies for cycling is a whole different conversation, my post was about the need for a shared set of expectations between drivers and cyclists and specifically one that instructed what to do, and not simply what not to.

Last edited by UniChris; 08-29-22 at 11:30 AM.
UniChris is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 11:29 AM
  #39  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,600
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18319 Post(s)
Liked 4,487 Times in 3,337 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent
Driving drunk, doing a hit and run, and lying about it is more than just a "mistake".
Originally Posted by aley
The cyclist who was hospitalized died of his injuries about two weeks later, so the charge becomes vehicular homicide.

I've seen conflicting information on what the difference in possible sentences is - some places say 0-6 years, and some say up to 15 years (with enhancements for prior DWIs, which won't apply in this case). Without getting into too much detail, it sounds like a six-year sentence is likely, though as I understand it
I'm a little divided on all this.

Ultimately there was no intent to go out and kill someone so this was an "accident". But it followed a string of poor choices made by the driver. Driving while intoxicated. Leaving the scene. Lying about the accident. etc.

I'm not sure justice will be served with the woman sitting in jail for a half a dozen years and the kid growing up without a mother.

On the other hand, killing someone should never be taken lightly. And, what about the victim's family?

I'd advocate for short jail time. Months? Time served?

But, be mandated to be "clean and sober", with regular random drug tests. Fail a drug test, and it is to the slammer. Not 0.08... but say 0.01... Not even alcohol mouthwash!!!

Take away the driver's license for a very long time. She can deal with bicycles, buses, and taxis.

She also needs to support her family. But, she should be given A LOT OF COMMUNITY SERVICE. Perhaps in the thousands of hours spread out over several years.

Restitution? How much is a life worth?

Life as a single mother is hard. But, life as a DWI Vehicular Homicide single mother should take an extreme amount of work to make it up.

And, the government shouldn't just step in and pay her for her hardships.
CliffordK is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 01:34 PM
  #40  
greatbasin
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2022
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked 84 Times in 65 Posts
A lack of intent doesn't make it an accident. It's called negligence. What's more, there is a difference between sole negligence and gross negligence. Sole negligence is just carelessness or inattentiveness. Gross negligence is a reckless or deliberate disregard for the reasonable treatment or safety of others. The collision doesn't have to be intentional for the disregard of reasonable treatment and safety of others to be deliberate. A person doesn't just inadvertently make the string of bad decisions to get drunk, drive, flee the scene of a crash where someone was injured, and then lie about it when questioned. Those things were all deliberate.
greatbasin is offline  
Likes For greatbasin:
Old 08-29-22, 01:53 PM
  #41  
UniChris
Senior Member
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked 393 Times in 282 Posts
Originally Posted by greatbasin
A lack of intent doesn't make it an accident.
Please consult a dictionary, as you are simply wrong about the meaning of the word.

The minute you insist on misusing words, you cease to be able to have a meaningful conversation with those who use their correct definition.

Last edited by UniChris; 08-29-22 at 01:56 PM.
UniChris is offline  
Likes For UniChris:
Old 08-29-22, 02:32 PM
  #42  
greatbasin
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2022
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked 84 Times in 65 Posts
I'm only disingenuously entertaining the exchange of sentiments with a pedant of digressive vocabulary. I never intended anything meaningful, so if it appeared that way it was by accident. I'll go bury my head in the QED as penance.
greatbasin is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 02:34 PM
  #43  
Milton Keynes
Senior Member
 
Milton Keynes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,947

Bikes: Trek 1100 road bike, Roadmaster gravel/commuter/beater mountain bike

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked 1,710 Times in 936 Posts
Originally Posted by jon c.
You say a great deal about yourself in that post, but I'm not sure what it has to do with cycling.
And I think what he's trying to say belongs in P&R.
Milton Keynes is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 02:39 PM
  #44  
Milton Keynes
Senior Member
 
Milton Keynes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,947

Bikes: Trek 1100 road bike, Roadmaster gravel/commuter/beater mountain bike

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked 1,710 Times in 936 Posts
Originally Posted by greatbasin
A lack of intent doesn't make it an accident.
Um, yes it does. Unless you intend on running over someone, then it's accidental. It can only be intentional or accidental. I totally agree with you on the negligence issue, though, but negligence isn't always intentional, either.
Milton Keynes is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 03:04 PM
  #45  
greatbasin
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2022
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked 84 Times in 65 Posts
It's not the collision that isn't accidental. You can't get drunk accidentally. You can't then accidentally drive your car. You can't accidentally leave the scene of a collision. You can't accidentally lie about it when questioned. Those things are not an accident. Whether they were intentional or not doesn't bear on the fact that they constituted gross negligence.
greatbasin is offline  
Old 08-29-22, 03:35 PM
  #46  
dabac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,688
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 295 Times in 222 Posts
Originally Posted by aley
….it's a little startling to hear my wife be the one saying, "But she just made a little mistake!"
Some people have this amazing ability to think that certain events only happen to ”other” people, and will NEVER happen to THEM.
How they manage to ignore the fact that, to the rest of the world, they themselves are ”other people” too I will never understand.
Anyhow, occasionally an event comes along that strikes so close to home - this could have been me - that it pops that bubble, that feeling of immunity. It can be quite upsetting, unnerving and will often release a considerable amount of emotions. Can be sympathy, can be something else.
dabac is offline  
Old 08-30-22, 07:37 AM
  #47  
JW Fas
Cop Magnet
 
JW Fas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked 274 Times in 128 Posts
To call these collisions is objectively accurate. To call them accidents is subjective until further evidence accrues. Even if you're a direct witness to the collision and the driver claims they didn't mean to do it, you can't call it an accident yet because you can't read their mind. The driver could be lying. How many parents here have witnessed their young child do something bad right in front of them only to hear the child say it was an accident? They lied straight to your face because deception is an ingrained part of our biological drive for self preservation. The key difference is that children are terrible liars, whereas grown adults have been around the block and learned to be better at it. I can accept the claim of "accident" if someone bumps into me in the hallway since the level of harm, if any, is extremely minimal. However, when somebody kills another human being with their multi-ton vehicle, I think it's reasonable to demand more than a hall pass and a note from Mom. We don't take this accident stance when one person shoots and kills another. We automatically assume the worst and wait for the investigation to reveal whether or not there was intent. Even in the absence of intent, we don't let the perpetrator off the hook if there was gross negligence. Yet, when motor vehicles kill the same amount of Americans annually as firearms, somehow we're willing to accept at face value that it was an accident.
JW Fas is offline  
Likes For JW Fas:
Old 08-30-22, 09:27 AM
  #48  
rydabent
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,054 Times in 634 Posts
Originally Posted by CliffordK
I'm a little divided on all this.

Ultimately there was no intent to go out and kill someone so this was an "accident". But it followed a string of poor choices made by the driver. Driving while intoxicated. Leaving the scene. Lying about the accident. etc.

I'm not sure justice will be served with the woman sitting in jail for a half a dozen years and the kid growing up without a mother.

On the other hand, killing someone should never be taken lightly. And, what about the victim's family?

I'd advocate for short jail time. Months? Time served?

But, be mandated to be "clean and sober", with regular random drug tests. Fail a drug test, and it is to the slammer. Not 0.08... but say 0.01... Not even alcohol mouthwash!!!

Take away the driver's license for a very long time. She can deal with bicycles, buses, and taxis.

She also needs to support her family. But, she should be given A LOT OF COMMUNITY SERVICE. Perhaps in the thousands of hours spread out over several years.

Restitution? How much is a life worth?

Life as a single mother is hard. But, life as a DWI Vehicular Homicide single mother should take an extreme amount of work to make it up.

And, the government shouldn't just step in and pay her for her hardships.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This was no accident!!!!
rydabent is offline  
Old 08-30-22, 10:35 AM
  #49  
Chuck Naill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: US
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 408 Post(s)
Liked 184 Times in 120 Posts
This occurred in 2015, I gave my 2010 Subaru Forester to my grandchild for her first car. I had babied that car for four years. Before she was of age, a cell phone distracted teen driving an SUV plowed into my daughter. So, she never got to enjoy the Suby. Yes, it was insured and all, but that does not replace the disappointment.
Chuck Naill is offline  
Old 08-30-22, 10:39 AM
  #50  
Koyote
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,764
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6882 Post(s)
Liked 10,871 Times in 4,636 Posts
Originally Posted by aley
Apparently her friend's daughter has never been in any kind of serious trouble before and has just gone through a rough divorce in which she's lost custody of her ten-year-old son.
This really stands out. When I was getting divorced (albeit many years ago and in a different state), my attorney told me, "You might get primary custody if you can prove that your wife is a crack *****...Otherwise, probably not." I'm not trying to start a P&R discussion about parental rights, but my attorney's point was that case law generally favors mothers more than fathers. If this woman lost custody, she likely has problems -- perhaps drinking, perhaps something else.

​​​​​​
Originally Posted by aley
"But she just made a little mistake!"
Mistake, accident, negligence, whatever. Semantics. Our opinions don't make a bit of difference to the legal system.
Koyote is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.